BS 2555 

H53G62 


'.'.•';: v -! 






• tf 



V s 



,v 



*^0« 










GOSPEL HISTORY 



A SYLLABUS 



V • 
Professor C. W. Hodge's Gospel History. 



PRINTED — NOT PUBLISHED — EXCLUSIVELY 
FOR THE USE OF STUDENTS OF THE 



MIDDLE CLASS IN PKINCETON SEMINARY 



[Prepared by the Class of '77.] 



PRINCETON: 

CHARLES S. ROBINSON, PRINTER. 



1876. 



<^*V 



Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1876, by 
C. W. HODGE, 
In the office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington. 



PREFACE. 



This volume originated in the desire to have in more permanent and 
satisfactory form, than the meager pencil-scratches of any ordinary set of 
notes, the substance of a highly- valued course of lectures. And it is but 
just to say that Professor Hodge is responsible for nothing here printed, 
since his manuscript was not consulted, and no part of the work was 
supervised by him. It may also be added that this Syllabus is not 
intended to be well understood except in connection with the full Lectures 
in the class-room, and also in connection with Robinson's Harmony and 
the small syllabus. 

The preparation of these notes has been a very laborious task, so much 
so that the editors have no expectation that their labor and pains will be 
adequately appreciated. But before any one indulges in wholesale criti- 
cism, let him first sit down and prepare, from the various sources, the 
manuscript for only five of these printed pages, taking special pains to 
look up the different authorities and hunt down the various references. 
'J hen let him remember that all this work had to be done in addition to 
the regular, and in some cases the extra, duties of the Seminary course. 
To any student who will comply with these two conditions, the editors 
herewith give full permission to cut and slash to his heart's content. 

ABBREVIATIONS. 



Alf. 


for 


A 1 ford. 


Rob. for 


Robinson. 


Ell. 




Ellicott. 


San. 


Sanhedrim. 


Gal. 


" 


Galilee. 


Syn., Syns. " 


Synoptists. 


Jerus. 


• l 


Jerusalem. 


Tisch. " 


Tischendorf. 


Lich. 


. " 


Lichtenstein. 


Wies. 


Wieseler. 



The other abbreviations will be readily understood by the reader 
Princeton Seminary, Feb. 25th, 1876. 



SYLLABUS OF GOSPEL HISTORY. 



CHRONOLOGY. 

1. Rationalists attempt to overthrow date of the Gos- 
pels, on external grounds ; they give a later date. 

2. Alleged discrepancies of the gospels are exagger- 
ated. Two kinds : general, in which a different character of 
Christ is presented; special, one gospel being supposed to 
contradict another. If we can trace a gradual historical 
growth from beginning to end, we have in this unity of 
the gospels, most effective answer to opponents. Birth- 
place of Christ is be} T ond question, but the date of birth 
is unknown. It is assigned to 753, 751, 750 (C. W. H.) 
749 (Rob.) 748 (Kepler) 747 (Ideler). N o one is at liberty to 
dogmatize where there is so much diversity of opinion. 
Give gospels benefit of their own reticence. It does not 
vitiate their historical value. The Passion is variously as- 
signed between 781—790. Positive chronology is the 
particular date. Relative chronology is the relation of 
events to one another, their succession. Absence of 
chronological precision shows it was not essential to the 
plan of the writer. It seldom disturbs the order; 
Matt, and Mark are less regular than Lk. and Jno. The 
year and the day of the nativity are to be determined. 
Present era was fixed in the 6th century by Dionysius, a 
Scythian monk who flourished in Rome 553 — 556 A. D. 
He assumed that year of Christ's birth was coincident 
with 754. If 750 be the correct date, our era begins 4 
years too late. This era was 1st used in historical works 
by Venerable Bede, early in the 8th century, afterward 
was introduced in public transactions by Frank kings, 
Pepin and Charlemagne. Gospels give 4 data : 

(1.) Time of Herod the Great, Matt, 2 : 1, Lk 1 : 5. 
(2.) Census in Judea under Augustus, Lk 2: 1. 
(3.) Star of the Magi, Matt. 2. 

(4.) Age of Christ when beginning public ministry, 
Lk 3 : 23. 



Josephns (Ant. 17 : 8:1):" Herod died, the 5th day after 
he had caused Antipater to be slain, having reigned, since 
he had caused Antigonus to be slain, 34 years ; but since 
lie had been declared king by the Romans, 37." (Ant'. 
17 : 6 : 4) : " Herod deprived Matthias of the high-priest- 
hood, and burnt the other Matthias, who had raised the 
sedition, with his companions, alive. And that very 
night there was an eclipse of the moon." Now Herod 
was declared king in 714; therefore his death would be 
from 1st Nisan 750 to IstNisan 751, ace. to Jewish com- 
putation, at age of 70. Astronomical investigation places 
this eclipse on the night of 12th and 13th of March 750. 
He was dead before the 5th of April, because the Pass- 
over of that year fell on 12th of April, and Josephus 
(Ant. 17 : 8 : 4) states that before this feast, his son and 
successor Archelaus, observed the usual 7 days' mourn- 
ing for the dead. His death, therefore, must be placed 
between 13th March and April 4th, 750. (Andrews). 
How long before Herod's death was the Lord born ? 
Matt, and Lk. relate events that occurred between his 
birth and Herod's death ; circumcision, presentation in 
temple, visit of Magi, flight into Egypt, murder of Inno- 
cents. Whatever view may be taken as to order of these 
events, they can scarcely have occupied less than two 
months. This would bring his birth into Jan. or Feb. at 
latest, 750. 

Luke 2 : 1-2 ; a all the world should be taxed. 

b the taxing was first made when Cyre- 
nius was governor of Syria. 

OBJECTIONS URGED. 

I. No such universal taxing under Augustus on record; 
the censuses of contemporary history are local ; a clear 
case of inaccuracy, say the skeptics. Ans. : It is known 
from Suetonius and Ancyrian monument, that Augustus 
three times instituted a census, in 726, 716, and 767. 
The second only needs to be considered. It appears to 
have been a census civium, confined to cives Romani, and 
not to have extended to the provinces ; cannot, therefore, 
have been the taxing of Lk. Some restrict oixou/isvy 
to Palestine or Syria. It would be improbable and un- 



natural for Luke to make this restriction. A better an- 
swer is, that if Lk. mentions the census, that is enough. 
Other answers : 1. The omission of contemporaries lias its 
analogy; an argument from silence is never conclusive. 
Various laws were established, of which we are informed 
by no historians, but bv monuments. In year of Caesar's 
death, there was a geographical survey of Rome, but his- 
torians do not tell us of it. Ancient historians omit to 
give a complete list of governors of the provinces. On 
this period, Suetonius and Tacitus are very brief. This 
argument from silence, if pushed, would compel us to 
believe that no important event took place in the long 
reign of Augustus, of which the few historians whose 
works remain have not made specific mention. 2. Prob- 
ably the censuses referred to on the Ancyrian marbles 
were confined to Italy, and did not extend to the Provin- 
ces. But beyond question, the census did at times ex- 
tend to particular provinces. 3. A considerable gap oc- 
curs here in Dion Cassius (Roman historian); from 747 
to 757, the very period in which Lk. savs the taxing was 
made. 4. In Joseph us the names of several who were 
governors of Syria about time of Lord's birth are men- 
tioned, but only incidentally, nor is the list complete. 
Being a professed Roman fiatterer, he leaves out all that 
might excite the discontent of Jewish readers. He passes 
over as lightly as possible whatever testifies to degrada- 
tion of his people. 

A j)osith:e argument is this : In time of Augustus, there 
'was strong tendency to centralization, and establishment 
of the military power. Tiberius read in Senate an auto- 
graph MS. letter of Augustus's, which showed resources 
of the empire, how many soldiers could be raised and 
how much money they could give. How did he know, 
unless he had tried it? The citizens of Ancyra had 
marble copies made of bronze tablets in which he re- 
corded the chief events of his life. In these he declares 
he made a census of Roman citizens four times ; shows 
that he was doing this kind of work and confirms Lk. in- 
directly. Cassiodorus says that a careful survey was 
made in all provinces where Roman sovereignty extended, 
that there were enrolment lists. His authority of itself 



would have no err at weight; but he may have read 
many works unknown to us, on this period. Mom m sen 
doubts his statement, but Zumpt accepts it. " Being a 
Christian, he might have drawn his information from 
Lk." (Lange). Suidas : "Augustus sent out twenty 
men of great probity into all parts of the empire, by 
whom lie made an assessment of persons and estates;" 
has no intrinsic improbability, but is unsupported. Sui- 
das, like Cassiodorus, was a Christian. 

Indirect Proofs. — 1. Under the Republic, each prov- 
ince retained its own mode of taking census, and under 
the Antonines, there was a regular land tax. 

2. Exemption from land tax in Italy (by jus Italicum) 
began with Augustus. The exception proves rule. The 
land and poll tax under Pompey must have been in full 
force, which presupposes a census. Here again is a diffi- 
culty. When was the census made ? 

II. Palestine was not yet a Roman province ; a Roman 
census was ordered during reign of Herod Great. But 
Herod was a rex sodas, who had to pay tribute to the 
Romans ; and then, this census may have been for statis- 
tical and military purposes, as in the decennial census of 
U. S. Jews were first compelled to pay tribute to Rome 
in time of Pompey. From time of Julius Caesar, certain 
tributes were levied in Judea for Rome. 

III. Cyrenius was Governor of Syria for 10 years after 
the nativity, and made a registration of inhabitants, Acts 
5:37. The trouble is, to find room for another census 
in Palestine under same Cyrenius and at time of Christ's' 
birth. Tholuck : "This enrolment took place before 
(Tzpcurrj) Cyrenius was gov. of Syria; npcorq in compara- 
tive sense as John 1 : 15. This solution is not impossible 
grammatically. The taxing in question was 1st, as dis- 
tinguished from 2d, which took place during h s 2d 
administration. Meander takes YJysfjLovsuovToz in wide 
sense of "leader;" is confirmed by Tacitus who says this 
man was thus employed. Ebrard : axoypafY] means reg- 
istration as well as taxation, o-ioypayq has a double sense : 
(a) transcription, (b) enrolment. If passage be read, this 
was 1st taxing, in distinction from 2d, and took place 
under him as governor of Syria, but in fact he was not 



so gov. until 760, we must construe ijysfiousoouToz as appli- 
cable to any one who rules. Thus Cyrenius may have 
been a joint or assistant ruler, as Joseph us speaks of 
Saturninus and Volumnius as Presidents of Syria ; or an 
extraordinary commissioner sent from Rome especially 
for this purpose. In all this, is nothing improbable ; it 
agrees with the fact that about that time he was in East 
and engaged in political affairs. Wieseler : "this taxing 
was before Cyrenius was gov. of S." Zumpt, in his list 
of Syrian governors, B. C. 30 to A. D. 6Q, thus fills the 
interval from 748 to 758 : 

748—750 P. Q. Varus or 6—4 B. C. 

750—753 Quirinus or 4—1 B. C. 

753—757 M. Lollius or 1 B. C. to 3 A. D. 

757—758 C. M. Censorinus or 3—4 A. D. 

758—760 L. V. Saturninus or 4—6 A. D. 

760 — -765 " '* is succeeded by Quirinus 

(Cyrenius.) 

If he be right, Quirinus was twice gov. of Syria. His 
fact is that because Cilicia, when separated from Cyprus, 
was united to Syria, Cyrenius or Quirinus, as gov. of the 
first mentioned province, was also really gov. of the last 
mentioned, whether in any kind of association with 
Saturninus, or otherwise, can hardly be ascertained, and 
that his subsequent more special connection with Syria 
led his earlier, and apparently brief, connection to be thus 
accurately noticed. Yarns was in office at least till 
the summer of 750. But that he did not continue as gov. 
until 759 is probable from the fact that Augustus ruled that 
no one should govern a province more than Hve years. 
A coin of Antioch proves that in 758 L. V. Saturninus 
was gov. of Syria. Zumpt's list shows who filled this 
office 750— 758, Varus till B. C. 4 or 750. No names 
are given till Quirinus A. D. 6, by Josephus. During 
interval he was on military duty near Syria. The tri- 
umphal insignia granted him prove him legate and in 
Syria. This taxing began a little before he became 
actual legate. As he had been proconsul in Africa, and 
as it was a rule that the same person should not be ruler 
over more than one of the consular or praetorian prov- 
inces under care of Senate, he could not have been gov. 



of any of the provinces adjacent, Asia, Pontus, Bithynia, 
Galatia; he must then have been acting as gov. of Syria 
and legate of emperor. If he succeeded Varus, he may 
have completed taxing begun before, ace. to Lk. Ter- 
tullian says the census at the birth of Christ was taken 
by Lentius Saturninus. When then was he gov. of Syr- 
ia? Most say 746 — 748 ; consequently the birth must be 
placed as early as 747. Mommsen adduces a marble 
recording honors to man who had been twice legate in 
Syria. Only two had been,L. Saterninus and Quirinus. 
Concerning importance of this investigation, we are not 
bound to establish any one of these views any more than 
Luke. 

Star of the Magi. — Kepler has shown that in year 
747 a three-fold conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in the 
sign Pisces occurred, and that in spring of followingyear 
planet Mars likewise appeared in this constellation. He 
regarded it as probable that an extraordinary star was 
conjoined with these three planets, as in 1603. He 
thought this conjunction formed star of Magi. Ideler 
rejects the new star of Kepler, and looking only to con- 
junction, puts birth 747 — thinks Christ was two yrs. old 
when the command of Herod was given. If this be true, 
the year would be 748, and agree with Kepler's conjunc- 
tion. Hence the star had been seen by Magi two years 
before their arrival at Jerusalem. Wieseler argues cor- 
rectly that we have no certain ground for believing that 
star of Matt, was this conjunction of planets. He men- 
tions that the Chinese astronomical tables record appear- 
ance of a new star at a time which coincides with the 4th 
year B. C. Precise conclusions are not to be drawn, but 
confirmation of approximate date is secured. 

Day of the Nativity. — Up to 4th century, 6th of Jan. 
had been observed as day of Lord's baptism, and had 
been regarded as day of his birth, from Lk. 3 : 23, the 
supposition being that he was just 30 when baptized. In 
4th century, under influence of western church, this was 
changed, and both churches observed Dec. 25th. This 
is good date, because it gives time enough for the records 
in Matt, to transpire. During Dec, Jan., Feb. and Mar. 
there is no entire cessation of rain for any long interval, 



3'et an interregnum of several weeks of dry weather gen- 
erally occurs between middle of Dec. and of Feb., some- 
what distinguishing the former rains of the season from 
the latter. Lightfoot : " The spring coming on, they 
drove the beasts into wildernesses, or champaign grounds, 
where they fed them the whole summer. The winter 
coming on, they betook themselves home again with the 
flocks and herds." The climate of Bethlehem is not un- 
like that of Jems., though milder. Shepherds could 
have been pasturing their flocks in Dec. Barclay : 
"in this month the earth is fully clothed with rich ver- 
dure, and there is generally an interval of dry weather 
between middle of Dec. and of Feb." (Andrews, 32-35). 
Abia's course was 8th in the 24. At destruction of tem- 
ple by Titus on Aug. 5, 823, the 1st class had just en- 
tered on its course- Its period of service was from the 
evening of the 4th of Aug., which was the Sabbath, to 
the evening of following Sabbath, Aug. 11th. We can 
now easily compute backward and ascertain at what time 
in any given year each class was officiating. 

Date of the Crucifixion. — Lk. 23 : 54 ; Mk. 15 : 42 ; 
Mtt. 27: 62. TzanafT/.eurj was common designation of 6th 
day of the week. The Sabbath occurring on 2d day of 
the feast, the 1st feast day became the preparation, the 
day before the Sabbath. 1. That Trapaazwi} might not be 
apprehended as the weekly one, referable to the Sabbath, 
but be regarded as connected with the feast day of the 
Pass., Jno. expressly adds tou Tidaya (19 : 14). 2. ruipaa- 
xeoTj — Friday in the passover season, or paschal week, as 
a day of preparation for the Sabbath. The true refer- 
ence is to the paschal feast, coming in on the evening of 
the day, of which feast the first day fell, according to 
John, upon the Sabbath. 

Day of Month. — Crucifixion was 14th or loth Nisan. 
Was the last meal of Christ with his disciples, the regu- 
lar Passover supper or did it anticipate it? Ans. The 
paschal lamb was usually killed 14th Kisan and eaten 
same evening. The meal, therefore, was on preparation 
day, Thursday, Nisan 14th, and the crucifixion on Fri- 
day, Nisan 15th. (Mkl4: 12; Lk 22: 7)). According 
to Synopts., the supper was the regular Passover. But 



10 

•John calls it the preparation of the Passover (19 : 14) ; 
speaks as if the paschal supper was legally upon the even- 
ing of Friday, and consequently the Lord, who ate it 
upon the evening of Thursday, ate it before the time. 
4 apparently discrepant references : 1. John nowhere 
calls it the Passover.. " Out of 9 times in which -daya 
is used by John, in 6 it is applied to the feast generally, 
and not to paschal supper only. The meaning in the 
Other 3 is in dispute." (Andrews). 2. Jno. 13 : 1— " Be- 
fore the feast ot the passover." Does this refer to the 
supper of verse 2 ? Tubingen critics say yes. Therefore 
it must have been a supper of a private nature, and not 
the Passover meal which it preceded ; and according to 
John, Jesus never ate the Passover, but only a private 
meal beforehand. Being crucified next day, it must have 
been on Thursday, thus directly contradicting Synopts, 
who make it fall on Friday. But the clause does not 
refer to the supper of verse 2 ; it refers to what immedi- 
ately follows, " that Jesus knew that his hour was come." 
He knew it beforehand. 

3. Jno. 18 : 28 — They themselves went not in, lest they 
should be defiled ; that they might eat the passover. 
Held : that on day of crucifixion, Passover was not yet 
eaten. As it was not eaten before 6 o'clock, i. e. at be- 
ginning of next day (the Jews' day commenced at even- 
ing) the defilement incurred in the morning would have 
ceased before the regular Passover. Probably " eat the 
Passover " is used here in more general sense of keeping 
the paschal feast, and is not confined to eating of the 
lamb. Their scruple could have had reference only to 
the paschal sacrifices offered during the same day before 
evening. 

4. Jno. (19: 14, 16) calls crucifixion day the prepara- 
tion of the Passover. The point at issue decides the gen- 
uineness of John's gospel. 

4 methods of meeting the difficulty : 

1. Some follow John, as most accurate, and allow that 
the others made a mistake. Reasoning : Jno. was an 
apostle, an eye-witness, and his gospel written last ; there- 
fore he would correct their mistakes. Bleek holds that 
Christ anticipated regular time of Passover ; he trans- 
lates Jno. 13 : 1 — " Before the feast, when Jesus knew 



11 

that his hour was come to depart out of this world unto 
the Father, having loved His own who were in the world 
(He did love thorn unto the end), when a repast was spread 
(or during supper)," &c. The sentence thus formed is 
intricate, unlike John's usual manner, and without ne- 
cessity. 

2. Some endeavor to reconcile Synopts. and John by ex- 
plaining away the Synoptical forms. Iso success. The 
Synoptics are explicit. 

3. Rationalists (Bretschneider, Baur, Davidson), uphold 
the synoptical account vs. John, maintain the former is 
true history and John not gen nine, think John wrote with 
dogmatic intent, not historically, and that the error shows 
he could not have been an eye-witness as he claims. 

4. Hengst., Wiesel., Rob., (215-222) and a majority of 
harmonists hold that synoptical accounts can be made to 
harmonize with John. John nowhere calls the meal a 
Passover, and this has negative weight. But omits Lord's 
Supper, and that does not warrant the conclusion that no 
such rite was instituted. He omits other things design- 
edly, because he possessed the Synoptists. The omission 
is a tacit reference to what they had written, and what 
needed no repetition. Thus answer 1st objection. 

The 2d, by making npb rr^ eoprr^ qualify eidcoz, or ere 
zeAoz YjdTLf/jsv. If eidcoz, the sense is: ' w Jesus, knowing 
before the testis al of the Passover, that his hour was 
come," &c. In this way the passage has no bearing upon 
the present question. If e^c ri^oc vj^dzqasu, it is equiva- 
lent to festival-eve, and here marks the evening immedi- 
ately before the hoprj or festival proper, on which eve, 
during supper, our Liord manifested his love to his dis- 
ciples by washing their feet. The 3d (18 : 28), by extend- 
ing meaning of nda-^a to paschal festival, and remember- 
ing that "eating the passover " meant not merely the 
paschal lamb of the evening before, but sacrifices and 
unleavened bread of the whole Passover week. The 4th 
(1 9 : 14), by interpreting ixapo.ay.vxq as referringto the Jew- 
ish Sabbath, which actually occurred next day. It was 
Friday in the passover season or paschal week. 

Bleek's Argument.—!. According to John's account 
(19 : 31) 15th Nisan, the great day of the feast coincided 
that year with the weekly Sabbath, (our Saturday); and 



12 

the day before (i. e. the Friday) would be the preparation 
day both for the weekly Sabbath and for the great feast 
day. He argues (a) that the Sanhedrim would not have 
sent an armed band vs. Jesus on the holy night after the 
eating of the Passover, because it was expressly forbid- 
den to carry arms on the Sabbath ; (6) that on such a night 
the Sanhedrim would not have sat in council to judge 
Jesus, for to hold a court of judgment on the Sabbath 
was expressly forbidden ; that crucifixion could not take 
place INlsan 15th, for it must have been a glaring viola- 
tion of the Sabbatical rest of the da^v, according to Jew- 
ish notions still in vogue. Yet Bleek admits that crimi- 
nals were often arrested on the Sabbath, and of course, if 
necessary, by men bearing arms. In opposition to Bleek: 
the strict Sabbatical law was not applicable to the feast 
Sabbath. Besides fanatics would have caused them to kill 
Christ, whenever they had opportunity. (Lk. 23: 2, 18). 
If the law did govern feast Sabbath, the hatred of the 
Jews made them break the law. (Andrews, 457). 

2. Luke 23 : 26, 27, we read that Galilean women, 
when they returned from the sepulchre, prepared spices, 
and rested the Sabbath day according to the command- 
ment, and returned again to the sepulchre when Sabbath 
was past. JSTow it would have been illegal for them to 
have prepared the spices on the day preceding the 
Sabbath, if that day was Nisan 15th. (Ex. 12: 16; 
Lev. 23: 7). The same argument applies to the 
burial of Jesus by Joseph of Arimathea on the day of 
crucifixion, and still more strongly to Lk. 23: 26 ; Mk. 
15: 21. Simon would not have been in the fields at 
work, Nisan 15th. Opposed : Here all depends on the 
strictness with which the Jews observed the feast Sab- 
baths. Maimonides mentions bathing and anointing, as 
things that might be done on the feast days; and of 
course then everything necessary to prepare the dead for 
burial would be permitted. Multiplication of instances 
may show that the law does not apply. 

3. The Synopts. had, as the basis of their narrative 
an account which represented the 14th Nisan, and not the 
15th, as the date of Christ's death. By a misunder- 
standing, however, there came to be incorporated with 
this the notion that Jesus ate the last supper with his 



13 

disciples at the hour legally instituted for the Jewish 
passover ; and as we have the Synopta., both representa- 
tions, though non-coincident, yet, unconsciously to the 
evangelists, now lie side by side. 

4. The feast (Easter, paschal eont. of 2d cent.) about 
which the dispute was, was held in Asia 14th Nisan, at 
the hour in which the Jews celebrated their passover 
(i. e., on the night which, according to Jewish reckoning, 
began Xisan loth); and hence Christians of Asia Minor 
who followed this practice were called Quarto-decimani. 
They were chiefly Jewish converts, and pleaded the 
authority of John and Philip. The western church, 
composed of Gentile converts, discarded the pass., and 
celebrated annually the resurrection on a Sunday, and 
observed the previous Friday as a day of penitence and 
fasting; pleaded authority of Peter and Paul. The Tu- 
bingen school (Hilgenfeld's Paschastreit, pp. 5-118) make 
inference vs. John and say that that Gospel was not 
ascribed to him by the East, church. Meander (Hist. I., 
513) thinks that Christians of Asia Minor celebrated 
Xisan 14th as day of Christ's death, but he says that they 
kept the Jewish passover and included in it the com- 
memoration of Christ's death. Bleek : "John's know- 
ledge that Jesus had eaten the last supper with his disci- 
ples not on the day legally fixed, but a day earlier, could 
not have obliged him to refuse to keep the yearly pass., 
as he had been wont to do at Jerus'm, among Christians 
at Ephesus, who also were wont to celebrate it, for Jesus 
himself had kept the pass, in the earlier years of his 
ministry. It is likely too that the Christians of Asia 
Minor subsequently retained the custom simply because 
it had become a custom, and because of the .opposition 
raisedvs.it." Hengst., Thol. and Wieseler urge that, 
according to John, Jesus celebrated last supper with 
disciples, not on the day of the pass, (evening of Xisan 
14th or beginning of Xisan 15th), but a day earlier, and 
therefore that John's account does not differ from that of 
Synopts. The harmonists find clear proof that eastern 
and western churches had all four gospels, proving they 
knew all the circumstances and saw no difficulty in the 
statements. 



14 

Wieseler: ISTisan 15th fell on Friday, 783 or A. D. 30. 
The darkness at crucifixion could not have been caused 
by an eclipse, for it was then full moon. Phlegon, of 
Tralles, tries to show that it was caused by an eclipse 
which took place between July 785 and 786. But the 
astronomer Wurm, that the eclipse referred to took 
place 782. 

Date of the Baptism. — Six data are a^iven in Lk. 3 : 
1-2: "JSTowin the 15th year (780) of reign of Tiberius 
Caesar, Pontius Pilate being Governor of Judea (779— 
789), and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee (750— 792) and 
his brother Philip being of Iturea and of the region of 
Trachonitis (750 — 787), and Lysanias the tetrarch of 

Abilene ( ), Annas (759—767) and Caiaphas (778— 

789) being the high-priests." Luke's least carelessness 
or ignorance of the history would lead to a mistake. 
Yet his credibility remains unimpeachable. An anach- 
ronism is charged. Joseph us mentions one Lysanias 
killed sixty years before. Therefore, it is said, that Lk. 
is sixty years too late. Lysanias was probably a family 
name. We can see clearly why Luke, writing after Abi- 
lene had been made a part of the Jewish kingdom, should 
have mentioned the fact, having apparently so little con- 
nection with gospel history, that at the time when the 
Baptist appeared, this tetrarchy was under the rule of 
Lysanias. It was an allusion to a former well-known 
political division that had now ceased to exist, and was 
to his readers as distinct a mark of time as his mention 
of the tetrarchy of Antipas, or Philip. This statement 
respecting Lysanias shows the accuracy of Luke's know- 
ledge of the political history of his times, and should 
teach us to rely upon it even when unconfirmed by con- 
temporaneous writers. Annas had been high-priest, } T et 
Caiaphas actually was such when the Baptist appeared. 
The sovereign pontificate had fallen to a degraded con- 
dition. The office had become subject to removal. Dis- 
missal from it happened almost every year (Jos. Ant., 
15:3:1; 18:2:2; 18:5:3; 20:9:1,4). Caiaphas 
maintained himself longer than the rest (25 — 36); his 
three predecessors only about one year each. As a Sad- 
ducee and a priest he was animated with double hatred 
to the Saviour. (Andrews 131 — 138). Lightfoot sup- 



15 

poses that Annas was the sagan, or vicarius of the high- 
priest, the next in order to him, in his absence to oversee, 
or in his presence to assist in the oversight of the affairs 

of the temple, and the service of the priests (C. W. II.). 
Wieseler: The common explanation, adopted by Farrar, 
is that Annas was Xasi or President of the Sanhedrim. 

Fifteenth Year of Tiberius Cjesar. — Luke 3:1, 23- 
Augustus died Aug. 767. The 15th year of Tiberius 
began Aug. 781. Christ's 1st Passover then would be in 
782. But~Luke 3 : 23, "he was about 30 years of age 
when lie began his ministry."' As already seen, he could 
not have been born later than 750. He must have begun 
liis ministry, therefore, 780, and been baptized in that 
year. Tertullian, however, gives the 15th year of Tibe- 
rius as the year of Christ's passion : a Christ suffered 
under Tiberius Osesar, R. Geminus, and P. Geminus, be- 
ing consuls, on the 8th day before the Calends of April," 
(25th March). He was followed by Lactantius, Augus- 
tine, and others, especially of the Latin Fathers. San 
Clemente so explains Luke from chronological necessity. 
He attempts to show that the 15th year of Tiberius is 
' ; not to be referred to the beginning of the ministry of 
John, nor to the baptism suffered by Christ in Jordan, 
but to the time of his passion and crucifixion, the evan- 
gelist himself being our leader and interpreter." This 
makes the whole ministry last but few months; Christ 
would be 32 years old at baptism, and John's account re- 
quires him to begin his ministry 3 years before, and be- 
fore Luke makes Baptist's ministry to begin. Brown 
thinks that the heading of St. Luke's 3d chapter contains 
the date, not of the mission of John the Baptist, but 
of the year of our Lord's ministry, especially in reference 
to the great events with which it closed. Wieseler refers 
Luke's words to the imprisonment of John, not to the 
baptism of Christ; holds that Christ was baptized 780, 
John was imprisoned 782, and Luke 3: 1 is anticipatory, 
and chapter following goes back to period prior to John's 
imprisonment. The exegesis is violent. The usual so- 
lution (started by Zumpt) is that 15th Tiberius dates from 
the time he was made associate emperor (765) by the Sen- 
ate, 2 years before the death of Augustus (767). This 
would bring 780 for the year of baptism and solve the 



16 

difficulties. There are various dates for computing the 
reign Augustus, according as he increased in power. The 
same is true of Tiberius. This increases the difficulty. 
Certain Egyptian coins date from the connection of Tibe- 
rius with Augustus. Tiberius obtained full control in 
the Provinces in 767. His 15th year then, 779, or first 
passover 780. Luke 3 : 23 — (a) began to be or (b) was 
about 30 when he began, i. e. his public ministry. 

The solution is confirmed by Jno. 2 : 20. Herod began 
the temple in 734 ; to this add 46 (time of building) and 
the result is 780, the proper date. 

RESULTS. 



ROBINSON. 




WIESELER. 


ZUMPT. 




Born 


749 


or 750 


. . 750 . . 


747 




. Pilate. 779-789 


Bap. 


779 


" 780 


. . 780 . . 


779A. D. 


26 . 


. Herod. 750-792 


1st Pass. 




780 


. . 781 . . 


780 " 


27 . 


. Philip, 750-786 


2d " 




781 


. . 782 . . 


781 " 


28 . 


. Lysanias, 


3d ■• 




782 




782 " 


29 . 


. Annas, 759-767 


Cruc. 




783 


. . 783 . . 




30 . 


. Caiaphas, 778-789 
. Tib. 76^ or 767-782 



Duration of the Public Ministry. — 3 views are held : 
1. That it was 3J years ; 2. 2J years; 3. 1 year or less. 
The Fathers, from Is. 61: 2, held that it was 1 year. 
But the word year is to be understood as the poetical 
parallel of day, or hour. The opinion of Fathers is also 
based on tradition of crucifixion 15th Tib., 782, com- 
bined with Luke's putting baptism same year. (Lk. 3 : 1). 
Brown holds that the ministry was 1 year, doubts the 
text (of John) even though it says the feasts were pass- 
overs. The Synopts. seem to give an entirely different 
account from John ; they saj 7 Christ went to Galilee and 
only after a considerable time went to Jerusalem and the 
Temple. John says he went to Jerusalem and the Tem- 
ple immediately, cleansed the latter, &c. The Synopts. 
make no feast till crucifixion ; inference, that ministry 
was 1 year or less in length. John makes scene Judea, 
and mentions 3 or 4 Passovers. The Synopts. were 
aware of Judean ministry: Mtt. 4: 25; 27: 57. When 
Saviour wept over Jerusalem, they mention it. There is 
no explanation except that he had worked in Jerusalem. 
Attempts to overthrow this argument do not succeed. 
Baur : that Jesus wept over the Jews in particular. B. 
had to give this up. Strauss : that the words are per- 



17 

sonified wisdom and are quoted from lost writings. 
Schenkel : that Jno.'s mention of Passovers all refer to 
one. Lk. 10 : 38. another reference to Jndean work. It 
is impossible that a pseudo-John should represent the 
course of the Life of Christ so differently from the 
Synopts., when the latter were duly accredited. He wrote 
with a dogmatic purpose, and would not expect to be be- 
lieved. On other hand John was aware of the Galilean 
work. (7 : 6-9.) He implies that Galilee had been the chief 
scene of our Saviour's visitations. He allows all the time 
necessary for it and on several occasions leaves it to be 
inferred. Jno. 6: 2, multitudes went with Jesus because 
of His miracles, but the miracles are not related. Jno. 
6 : 66, many of his disciples went back from him, but 
Jno. had not told us of the formation of a band of disci- 
ples. Jno. 6 : 70, the 12 are mentioned, but there has 
been no account of their calling. Between chapters 6 
and 7, there is an interval of 7 months. To reconcile 
Synopts. and Jno., all that can be required is to give a 
good reason for their differences. The Synopts.' plan in- 
cludes active life in Galiiee. Matt, seeks proof in mira- 
cles for Christ's Messiahship. Luke gives biography of 
Christ in his active work. Jno. came later, when doc- 
trinal points were discussed, particularly the person of 
Christ. Jno's purpose is to give His own discourses so 
that they may know what He claimed concerning Him- 
self. It was not in Galilee, in parable, that these pro- 
found Christological statements were made. It was 
among the educated, cultivated Pharisees of Jerusalem. 
Ren an : " I dare defy an}' person to compose a consis- 
tent life of Jesus, if he makes account of the discourses 
which John attributes to Jesus." 

John's feasts : 1. " the Jews' passover," (781) (Jno. 2 : 
13) ; 2; " a feast of the Jews, (782) (5 : 1) ;" 3. " the Pass, 
nigh," (6: 4); 4. " Before Pass.," (12 : 1); 5. "feast of 
Tabernacles," (7 : 2); 6. " feast .of dedication," (10 : 22); 
(Bible Diet, for Pass., Pentec, Tabern., D^dic, and Pu- 
rim.) Of these feasts 4 were Passovers, if Jno. 5 : 1 be 
so interpreted. We gain or lose a year here. Pentecost 
occurred this year (782) on the 19th of May. No special 
argument in its favor; was not so generally attended as 
Passover or Tabernacles, and no reason appears why 



18 

Jesus should have omitted Passover and gone up to 
Pente. Tabernacles followed, Sept. 23d. Chief argu- 
ment in its favor : it brings feast of 5 : 1 into close con- 
nection with that of 7 : 2, and thus best explains 7 : 21-23. 
But some months more or less are not under the circum- 
stances important, for the miracle with its results must 
have been fresh in their minds even after a much longer 
interval. If He had not in the interval between these 
feasts been at Jerusalem, as is most probable, His reap- 
pearance would naturally carry their minds back to the 
time when they last saw him, and recall both his work 
and their own machinations vs. Him. The great objec- 
tion to identifying the feast before us with that of Taber- 
nacles is that it puts between the end of ch. 4, and be- 
ginning of ch. 5, a period of 8 or 9 months, which the 
Evangelists pass over in silence. 

Four Objections vs. Passover. — 1. Jno. 6: 4,"passover 
nigh." Christ did not attend. If not, then he was not 
at any feast till Tabernacles (7 : 2), a period of 18 mos. ; 
was absent from Jerusalem for that time. Argued : as a 
strict Jew he could not have been so long away. Ans. : 
that Jesus should have absented himself for so long a 
time from the feasts is explained by the hostility of the 
Jews, and their purpose to slay Him (Jno. 5 : 16-18 ; 
7 : 1). We know He would not needlessly expose Him- 
self to peril. To the laws of God respecting the feasts 
He would render all obedience, but with the liberty of a 
son, not the scrupulosity of a Pharisee. He was Lord 
of Sabbath ; so He was of the feasts. He attended them 
or not as seemed best to Him. Chief argument in favor 
of P u rim is, that it is brought into such close connection 
with the Passover (only 7 mos. absent). Ellicott : " If 
the note of time derived from Jno. 4 : 35 be correct, then 
the festival here mentioned clearly falls between the end 
of 1 year and the Passover of the one following (6: 4) 
and therefore can be no other than the feast of Pnrim." 
That Jesus should have absented himself a long time 
from the feasts,' is explained by the hostility of the Jews. 

2. John does not here name the festival, whereas he 
seems always to specify it (2 : 13, 23 ; 6 : 4 ; 7 : 2 ; 10 : 23 ; 
11: 55; 12: 1). 



19 

3. That if 5 : 1 and G : 4 are Passovers, there is a whole 
year of which Jno. gives no account. Ans. : this is in 
accordance with analogy of J no's gospel. The Synopts. 
fill in this and Jno. confines himself to feasts. Andrews: 
"this is not the only instance in which Jno. narrates 
events widely separated in time, without noting the in- 
terval. Thus, ch. 6 relates what took place before a 
Passover, and ch. 7 what took place at feast of Taber- 
nacles, 6 months after. In 10 : 22 is a sudden transition 
from Tabernacles to Dedication." 

4. Accounts for Synopts. not mentioning feasts. His 
work in Galilee has reference to national salvacion thro' 
the faith of those who should believe on him there. 
This may explain their silence in respect to the feasts 
which Jesus attended while in Galilee. Any transient 
work at Jerusalem, addressing itself especially to the 
hierarchy, had no important bearing upon the great 
result. 

For Passover. — 1. Common text wrongly omits arti- 
cle, which would naturally refer to chief feast. Modern 
critics and best MSS., including Sinaitic, agree as to this. 
(Winer, p. 119 or 126). Lange : " The article is not ab- 
solutely conclusive, for in Heb. a noun before the gen. 
is made definite by prefixing article, not to noun itself, 
but to the gen., and the same is the case in the Sept." 
Ellicott : " The true reading appears certainly to be koftzr^. 
It has in addition to secondary authorities, the support 
of three out of the four leading uncial MSS., and is 
adapted by Lachm., Tisch., and others." Tholuck: 
" Were the article genuine, we would be compelled to 
regard the Passover as meant. If it is not genuine, the 
Passover may be meant, but so also may some other 
feast.". (Andrews, 172). 

2. Phrase "feast of the Jews" is not applicable to Purim. 
P. was " not a Mosaic feast, nor of divine appointment, 
but established by the Jews while in captivity, in com- 
memoration of their deliverance from the murderous plans 
of Haman. (Esther, 3 and 9). It was national and po- 
litical, rather than religious. Why then should Jews go 
up ir g:ii Jerusalem to this feast? Ellicott: " The view 
of the best recent harmonists and commentators is that 
feast, was the feast of Purim." Lange: "Fanaticism in 



20 

the people naturally sought to make it a festival of tri- 
umph over the Gentiles (subsequently over the Christians 
also.) On this account, the particular feast was preemi- 
nently the feast of the Jews (with the art.) and the art. in 
C. Sinaiticus cannot be made to speak exclusively for 
pass." 

3. Jesus went and found a crowd. P. was observed all 
over the land : had no reference to Jems. No special 
services were appointed for its observance at the temple, 
nor does it appear that it was their custom. Each Jew 
ooserved it wherever he chanced to be. Lange : " Christ 
may have attended this f. as he attended other festivals, 
(7 : 2 ; 10 : 22) without legal obligation, merely for pur- 
pose of doing; good." 

4. No adequate motive is assigned for Christ's going to 
Jerusalem: he was not required to do so by the law. El- 
licott : " In the year under consideration, Passover would 
occi>r only a month afterward, and our Lord might well 
have thought it was advisable to fix his abode at Jerusa- 
lem and to commence his preaching before the hurried 
influx of the multitudes that came up to the great vearlv 
festival." 

5. Healing of infirm man was on a Sabbath. The fes- 
tival of Purim ksted 2 days, and was regularly observed 
on 14th and 15th Adar (March) ; but if 14th happened to 
fall on Sabbath, or on 2d or 4th day of the week, the 
commencement of the test, was deferred until the next 
day. Purim was never celebrated as a Sabb. Lange : 
" The Sabb. spoken of 5 : 9 may have preceded or suc- 
ceeded the feast." 

6. Lk. 13 : 6-7. " These 3 years." Hengst. says the 
reference is to Jewish people, among whom Christ had 
wrought for 3 years. But we cannot draw argument from 
parable ; not conclusive enough. Andrews : " It is doubt- 
ful whether the expression has any chronological value." 
Lange : " If one insists on having a clef, time for God's 
work of grace on Isr., we may reckon the time from the 
public appearance of Jno. B., one-half year before the 
entrance of Jesus upon his office, up to the present mo- 
ment, which altogether does not make up much less than 
three years." 



21 

7. Time needed for events. Otherwise we must com- 
press into one month, what according to the other scheme 
took a whole year. It can hardly be conceived that he 
should have done so much in such narrow limits. The 
harmony will make Christ's ministry 3 J years (Rob.) or 2J 
(Wiese. and Zumpt). 

PREPARATORY PERIOD. 

§1. Limits: from beginning of gospel narrative until 
entrance upon public ministry. Subdivision : [a) all pre- 
ceding nativity; [b) all succeeding it until entrance upon 
public ministry. Mtt. and Lk. are authorities for nativity, 
and are supplementary to one another, in no case paral- 
lel. Matt, gives histor. proof that Jesus was the Messh. of 
0. T. Therefore he records his birth, genealogy, and 
other events connected therewith. Lk. gives events in 
order, and therefore goes back to annunciation and to his 
predecessor. Mk. portrays active life of Christ. John's 
design is to represent him as a historic person in his own 
words. The history differs from every other h. The 
facts have no parallel ; naturally it should have none. 
The miraculous element predominates here as nowhere 
else. This is history written for a purpose. Charged : 
that it was written afterward. But we have, intermingled, 
the divine, angelic, and human. When the Son of God 
was to come, there must be peculiar circumstances. Un- 
believers stumble here, and believers find proof for gen- 
uineness. Some believers, however, find their strongest 
difficulty here. 

Classification of characteristics : (a) Events were 
to be so adapted as to form basis of our faith. 
If it be true that Son of God became S. of man, 
it is more than probable it was done in this way. We 
must have practical evidence of birth at the time of its 
occurrence. It would not do to attest it afterward, else 
it would be charged that it was an invention, or dream of 
an enthusiast. Ebionites and Socinians say he became 
Son of God first at baptism. Miraculous element, there- 
fore, is inseparable from the hist. It grows out of it 
from the very nature of the case. Incarnation itself the 
greatest miracle. (6) Publicity must be secured ; atten- 
tion attracted. Chain of evidence was so good, as here 



22 

written, that it was never doubted by enemies (primi- 
tively). (<?) The child mast be secured, so as not to ap- 
pear a rival of civil rulers, and to prevent premature 
action by them. Yet witnesses must be numerous enough 
to identify Christ from birth; to show that babe of Beth- 
lehem and Jesus of Naz. were one and same person. 
(d) While humility of Son of God was to be shown, yet 
from first moment, he must be attended with all dignity 
and honor due to divinity. He must bring heaven with 
him, angelic choir, homage of good men (Sheph'ds and 
Magi). As at cross, so at manger, humility is relieved 
by heavenly dignities, (g) Ante-typical ; as life and death 
of Christ are the final facts of 0. T., it must be shown 
he came to fulfill it. Unity of divine plan must be vin- 
dicated ; his relation to the law be made clear. These 
things belong to this period as preparatory. If men had 
been left in doubt, they would have rejected Christ at 
beginning of his ministry. Hence we read repeatedly, 
"all this, that the Scriptures" &c. ; we see express re- 
cognition of faithful few, in whom spirit of old economy 
was manifested. Gospel hist, is last ch. of old dispens'n. 
IS. T. begins with Pentecost, where O T. scenery, poe- 
try, &c, find their fulfillment, if) Typical; his life is 
type of every Chn. and of Church as whoie. Old 
economy is typical bee. it points to the future, as it em- 
bodies what has been already realized. That very life 
in which the old is fulfilled is still a type of Chn. spirit- 
ual life. Impossible to interpret Gospels and Acts, without 
violating meaning, unless we believe facts are arranged 
purposely to embody the doct, the spiritual truth. Such 
were miracles, the fact that he carried his dealings be- 
yond borders of Palestine (gospel for world). Why did 
he attend temple? why submit to circum. ? to teach the 
evil of sin. 

§2. Official character of John Baptist was necessary at 
outset. Ritualists claim Christ was disciple of John, that 
his work grew out of John's. Annunc'n of Bapt's birth 
prepared people and his parents to understand his mis- 
sion, and how to treat him. Honor is done to O. T. in 
choosing priest of temple (1 Chrom, 24), prophecy is 
fulfilled, type is given, in declaration that John was to be 
a Nazarite from the womb (as Samuel and Samson). 



23 

Spiritual meaning of incense is seen (prayer) ; Lk. 1 : 10. 
Emphasis is laid on character of parents (Lk. 1 : 6), they 
were observers of rites and exercised a lively faith. Cer- 
emonial righteousness was their possession. Mass of the 
Jews corrupt. But some were willing to introduce new 
economy. Meaning of both names was explained and 
fulfilled by what happened to those who bore them : 
Zach. (the Lord remembers), Eliz. (God's oath). Hope 
of giving birth to the deliverer was common among Jew- 
ish women. 400 yrs. angelic visitation had been discon- 
tinued, now it is renewed. John asNazarite (Numb. 6 : 
1-21) was to be a reformer. Mai. 4 : 6, the Jewish con- 
ception of this p'cy was that E. was to be the forerunner 
and hence had not died. This impressiou was to be cor- 
rected. Z's faith not strong enough at first ; asks a sign, 
and is given one (dumbness, a punishment for his unbe- 
lief). "As faith is to be the chief condition of the new 
covenant, it was needful that the first manifestation of 
unbelief should be emphatically punished ; but the wound 
inflicted becomes a healing medicine for the soul." 
(Lange). 

Objections answered : 1. Z's treatment was not 
only punitive but was to confirm his faith, and to be 
a lesson to the people. 2. Strauss objects, that a name is 
given to an individual angel, wh. we do not find in 0. T. 
until after the captivity in Danl. Obj'n is therefore that 
Jews had no doct. of angels before captivity, that they 
borrowed their ideas from Persians. If so, how came 
they to have Hebrew names ? Furthermore (a) the 0. T. 
is full of the doct. ; and (b) we have no proof that Jews 
borrowed from Persians ; (c) Tho' names are given to none 
until Dan.'s time, yet it is characteristic of O. T. to be 
progressive. Names of angels might be expected in an 
Apocalyptic book like Dan. (d) Doct. of angels was re- 
ceived and confirmed by Christ and Apostles. 3. Doubt- 
ed, whether such definite names are borne in heaven. 
Gab'l represents ministries of angels toward man ; Mich, 
is type and leader of their strife, in God's name and His 
strength vs. the power of Satan. In O. T., therefore, he 
is guardian of Jewish people in their antagonism to god- 
less power and heathenism. Many Reformers embraced 
idea that Mich, is Christ. If true, some would represent 



24 

name of Gab'l (man of God) in same way. Interpretation 
is inadmissible. Whenever angel Jehovah appears, it is 
always as God. We are never left in doubt. 

Myth, theory holds that this was a mvth'l age, that dis- 
ciples believed Christ was raised from dead, owing to the 
enthusiastic statements of the women. Myth is a story or 
narrative, involving moral or relig. truth, in wh. narrative 
form and idea involved are blended. There is no conscious 
invention to give birth to a popular idea. This theory 
saves moral character of early disciples; holds that John 
became imp. after he began his public ministry, and these 
stories grew up in connection with both. Only question 
is, how much is mythical and how much historical ? Prac- 
tical application of the theory necessitates in many cases 
the charge of conscious deceit. Naturalistic exp. maintains 
that Christ worked great cures, but by nat. causes. He 
seemed to raise from dead, but the man was not dead. 
So here, Z. was paralyzed owing to excitement. Tendency 
hypoih. holds that there was a conscious falsification of 
history in accommodation to certain current ideas; hist, 
is rewritten to give currency to certain doctrines. Strauss 
(2d Life) came over to this theory; shifted his ground. 
Legendary theory (Kenan) holds there is a basis of fact, 
but altered by blending of natural enthusiasm and pious 
fraud; very much like legends of saints in Rom. church. 
Kenan adopts more of Gospels than others, because his 
romancing is not bound by so doing; his method is not 
so destructive as Strauss's. 

§3. Six mos. alter conception of Elizabeth, an angel 
(Gab.) appears to Mary and announces that she was to 
give birth to Messiah. Points of analogy and contrast 
with annunc'n and birth of John (Alexander) : 

1. Analogy: 

{a) Both were announced by angel of God. 
ib) " to be extraordinary. 

(c) " named by the angel. 

(d) " connected with prophecy. 
{e) Offices of both were described. 

(/) In both, a sign was given to strengthen faith of the 
parents. 

2. Contrast: 

{a) John's was communicated to priest in the temple; 
Christ's to humble virgin in small town of Galilee. 



25 

(b) John's announcement was more honorable than 
Christ's birth. 

(c) Our Lord surrounded his messenger with pomp 
which he denied to himself. 

The announcement must be made previously to his 
birth, that the woman may know what was happening- to 
her. Is. 7 : 14 fulfilled in'Mt. 1 : 23. A virgin betrothed 
should be chosen, partly that she might be protected by 
a good man in circumstances into which she was brought, 
partly that the heirship to the throne might be conform- 
ed to. Two points : 1. Whether both (J. and M.) were of 
house of David. 2. Whether Lk. 1 : 27 is to be confined 
to Jos. Angel tells M. that the child must be of h. of D. 
What meaning would this have to her before her concep- 
tion, unless she knew that she was of h. of D. ? Lange 
" The words relate solely to J. They by no means deny 
descent of M. from D." Annuuc'n was private to avoid 
notice of civil authorities and the jealousy of Herod. Lk. 
1 : 32, Dan. 7 : 14, his kingship over Israel is promised. 
For M., intimate with 0. T., this p'cy wd. contain essence 
of most remarkable promises (2 Sam. 7, Ps. 45, Is. 9, 
Mic. 5). Lk. 1 : 42, 44, the extraordinary conception of 
her kinswoman was a sign of more ext. c. of her own. 

Objections : 1. That doct. of immac. conception is 
inadequate to account for sinlessness of Jesus. But he 
who was light and life of men must surely see light of 
day, not by carnal procreation, but by immediate exer- 
cise of divine power. How could he be free from every 
taint of original sin, and redeem us from power of sin, if 
he had been born by fleshly intercourse of sinful parents ? 
The strong and healthy graft which was to bring new life 
into the diseased stock, must not originate from this stock, 
but be grafted into it from without. Miraculous concep. 
is a (jyAioolov to those alone who will see in our Lord 
nothing but pure humanity, and who put his sinlessness 
in place of the real incarnation of God in him. Ration- 
alistic explanation : that he was of ordinary birth, and 
that this view existed among the Jews, and contined un- 
til the 5th cent. By that time, gospels were embellished 
to give expression to current views, and the conclusion 
is the immaculate concep. Answ'd : (a) The relation in 
wh. Christ stands to his mother is emphasized, as com- 



26 

pared with Jos. The latter is never mentioned except as 
protector of Christ's infancy. From the moment of the 
conception, the Holy Spirit continued to influence and 
penetrate mind and spirit of M., to suppress power of sin 
and make her body his consecrated temple, (b) Titles, 
" born of a woman," " made flesh," " son of man," the 
constant reference to mode of his origin, as well as the 
nature of his constitution show his relation to the wo- 
man was more important than to the man. (c) The doc- 
trine is based on prophecy. 2. That in gospels he is son 
of Jos. (John 1 : 45 ; Lk. 4 : 22 and 2 : 48). Mary, in pub- 
licly speaking to her son of Jos., must say " thy fa- 
ther." Pressense : " This assertion son of Jos. is always 
put into mouth of Jews as sign of unbelief or contempt. 
It is even so in the case of Nathaniel." 3. That the 
doctrine is not found elsewhere in N. T. Then we have 
no Saviour. 

Naturalists and others indulge in different forms of 
blasphemous interpretation. They deprive Jos.'s bride 
of chastity and purity, her richest dowry. The notion 
was first conceived in brain of heathen (Celsus) who de- 
rides mother of Jesus as victim of seduction. Jewish 
version of this fable {rationalism a* vulgaris) names one 
Panthera or Pandira as her seducer. Myth theory : that 
this conception in cont. to hist, probability, that Jews 
did not sympathize with expression "sons of God," bee. 
polytheistic. It was a story invented to support church 
claims, referring to the religious feeling of ancients, who 
revered their great men so much as to make them sons 
of God (numerous in mythology.) So also, it is said, 
the Evangelists did with Christ. 

§4. Visit of Mary to Eliz. Ebrard and others : that 
Jos. had taken his betrothed wife to his home, after a 
public solemnization of their nuptials, before this jour- 
ney. Alford : " that as a betrothed virgin she could not 
travel alone." But that no unmarried female could 
journey to visit her friends is incredible. M. may have 
journeyed with friends, or under spec'l protection of a ser- 
vant, or with neighbors going to Pass. Lange : '• She told 
Jos. of visit of angel." But Jo's knowledge of her con- 
dition was subsequent to her return. M. leaves it to God 
to enlighten him as He had her. 3-fold design of visit : 



27 

1. To give occasion for exercise of the spirit of inspi- 
ration, to confirm claims of the 2 children. 

2. To connect these extraordinary events in minds of 
people, before these persons were born. The children 
were brought together in the bosoms of their mothers. 

3. To make known their relative dignity ; Jesus over 
Jol n. 

Mary's hymn is modeled on Han n all's. (1st Sam. 2). 
It may be divided into 3 or 4 strophes, forming an ani- 
mated doxology. The grace of God (Lk. 1 : 48), his om- 
nipotence (49-51), his holiness (49, 51, 54,) his justice 
(52 — 3), and especially his faithfulness (54-5), are cele- 
brated. It sounds like an echo of Miriam's and Debor- 
ah's harps ; has characteristics of Heb. poetry, intone 
and language, and can be rendered almost word for word. 
Historically, it is important as showing the Messianic 
hope, and the form of Messianic expectation. Lk.'s pre- 
face is classical Greek; yet this hymn is in best Hebrew. 
This fact confirms hist, proof of text. Obj'ns : Rational- 
alists reject the supernatural and account for it on nat. 
grounds. Meyer rejects it on purely subjective grounds 
(M. could not go alone and Eliz. would not receive her). 
Strauss consistently rejects all, even the relationship bet. 
Jesus and John. Home of Zach. : " The supposition is 
that ' loud a (Lk. 1 : 39) has been substituted for "loura, 
and it is credible." (Lange.) Most common idea: that 
Hebron was the place, bee. in "the hill country.*' It was 
17 miles S. of Jerusalem. (20 Rom. miles.) 

§5. Birth of John. Effect was shown by the concourse 
at his circumcision. It was customary to name child on 
same day, as circumcision (Gen. 21 : 3, 4). Eliz. insisted 
on his being called John. Some say that Zach. had not 
told Eliz. of the name given in temple. Therefore this 
was new revelation. Most likely he had told her. From 
making signs to Zach., some have inferred that he was 
deaf as well as dumb. Others : it was to spare the feel- 
ings of mother. Zach. wrote on tablet that his name was 
John (already given and not open to change). The first 
K". T. writing opens with grace. Prophetic cycles accom- 
panied great hist, epochs; there is an equal advance of 
proph. with hist. It comes at revolutionary periods : 
Moses, Joshua and Judges, the completed kingdom un- 



der David and Solomon; Isaiah, Hosea, &c, during As- 
syrian period; Jere., Hab'k, Zpph., during period of exile. 

Zaehariah's song was to Jewish witnesses a renewal of 
inspiration, the highest circumstance of the occurrence. 
For 400 years it had ceased. By its renewal, they regard- 
ed a new national change as intended. Like Mary's, it 
refers to fulfillment of 0. T. prophecies, but is not based 
on any 0. T. song, and is more national than individual. 
In Mary's there is a relative want of originality, and it is 
full of reminiscences. Lange : "The royal spiritismore 
expressed in her song; the priestly character in Zach.'s 
In his the O. T. type, in hers the New prevails." Mary's 
expectations of the Messiah (Lk. 1 : 5) were not. of a 
particular and exclusive, but of an universal nat. Zach's 
song (Lk. 1 : 76, 78) is a striking proof of the prevalence 
of theocratic over paternal feeling, as the Mssh. is al- 
ways placed in a more prominent position than his fore- 
runner. Dayspring, Mai. 4 : 2. Both songs breathe 
theocratic spirit of 0. T. ; show the expectation of Him 
who was to have spiritual rule. John dwelt by himself 
in wild and thinly peopled region S. W. of Dead Sea 
near his home, perhaps to show by bis seclusion that he 
was uninstructed in ordinary way but by Holy Ghost. 
Renan : " the masses had become accustomed to look 
upon 'the man of God' as a hermit. They imagined 
that all the holy personages had their days of penitence, 
of severe life, and of austerities. It was readily con- 
ceived that the leaders of sects must be recluses, having 
their peculiar rules and their institutes, like the found- 
ers of rel. orders." Strauss and Meyer see in his seclu- 
sion, influence of theEssenes(myst. ascetics and devotees). 
But there is no analogy. N. T. does not mention them, 
Josephus does largely. 

§6. Annunciation to Joseph nee, bee. a direct wit- 
ness was needed to the person most interested, to show 
that her acct. was not a mistake nor a matter of mere 
enthusiasm. Her explanations were not believed and her 
faith was tested. Jos. determ'd to divorce her (privately). 
Milman : "Bill of divorce was nee. even when the par- 
ties were only betrothed, and where the marriage had 
not actually been solemnized. It is probable that the 
Mosaic law wh. in such cases adjudged a female to death 



29 

(Dt. 20 : 23-5) was not at this time executed in its origi- 
nal vigor." Joseph was dixatoz (Mtt. 1 : 19), not kind, 
but legally just, merciful. A public divorce would be 
in writing from the priest, with the causes of it stated, 
else the woman could not marry again. Annunciation 
was at Xaz. God appears 4 times to him in a dream (Mtt. 
1: 20; 2: 13; 2 : 19 ; 2: 22). Prophecy of Mtt. 1: 22 
is uttered by the angel, from Is. 7 : 14. Strauss : it is 
not at all applicable to Christ ; the Evgst. by mistake 
thought it was. Alexander: "the application of it 
to Christ is not a mere accommodation, meaning that the 
words originally used in one sense, and in reference to 
one object, might now be repeated in another sense, and 
of another subject ; for this does not satisfy the strong 
sense of the passage (that it might be fulfilled), nor would 
such a fanciful coincidence have been alleged with so 
much emphasis by Mtt., still less by the angel. The 
only sense that can be reasonably put upon the words is, 
that the miraculous conception of Mssh. was predicted 
by Is. in the words here quoted. This essential meaning 
is not affected by the question whether the prediction 
was first fulfilled in the nat. birth of a child soon after it 
was uttered, and the subsequent deliverance of Judah 
from invasion, but again fulfilled in a higher sense, in 
the nativity of Christ : or whether it related only to the 
latter, and presented it to Ahaz as a pledge that the 
chosen people could not be destroyed until Mssh. came." 
Best resort is (Heugst.) that the prophecy applies to. 
Christ, and is presented to Ahaz as the sign of deliver- 
ance. 

Matt, gives an nunc, to Jos. only; Lk. to Mary only. 
Objected: 1. That these aects. exclude each other. 2. 
That the child's name was given to Jos., after it had been 
given to Mary ; therefore not nee. second time. The 
two accounts harmonize and confirm each other. Each 
supposes the same basis of fact, (a) Silence in one hist, 
does not contradict a statement in another, (b) Selection 
of incidents is ace. to their respective plans. Matt, giv- 
ing Jos's genealogy, must show how Jos. took Mary as 
his wife. He is theocratic. Jesus is presented as ful- 
fillment of the theocracy. Lk. supplements Matt, and 
gives what belongs to Christ's human relations; depicts 



30 

the Son of Man appearing in Israel, but for benefit of 
whole race of man. 

§7. Birth of Jesus was at Beth. In consequence of an 
edict that all the world should be taxed, Jos. and Mary 
leave Naz. to go to Beth, the city of Dav. to be taxed 
there. Pressense : "The Jewish law laid no obligation on 
a woman to undertake such a journey, for the writing of 
her name was enough. But who can wonder at the young 
wife, situated like Mary, accompanying her protector? 
Besides, she was not ignorant of the prophecy which 
pointed out Beth, as the city of Messiah." Lk. dates from, 
decree of Augustus, bee. it was the occasion that brought 
Jos. and Mary to Bethlehem. It suggests 1. That the 
Saviour was born during the reign of Augustus (the 
golden age of Roman history). 2. That the theocracy 
had sunk to its lowest possible level. 8. That the pa- 
rents enrolled their names in the registration of the whole 
world. 

Jewish law required the enrolment of women and 
hence this law took them to Beth. (See preceding quot. 
from Pressense). Farrar : " Women were liable to a 
capitation tax, if this enrolment (anoypayiq) also involved 
taxation (d/ioW/r^c)." The Roman law cared not where; 
it required, however, enrolment of whole world, and 
hence Mary is included. Lange : " The enrolment would 
naturally take place in Judea, in consideration of the 
claims of nationality. The policy of Rome, as well as 
the relig. scruples of the Jews, demanded it. For this 
reason, every one went to his ancestral city to be regis- 
tered, though in other cases the Roman census might be 
taken, either ace. to place of residence or forum originis" 
Place of birth a manger ; evidently so ordered to signify 
the voluntary self-denial of Jesus. Calvin : " descend- 
ants of the royal race were designedly, harshly, and in- 
hospitably treated by Rom. officials.'' Lange: ; ' that 
Jos. and Mary were poor." But we are not to under- 
stand that they were poor or oppressed by Rom. authori- 
ties. It was simply bee. there was no room for them in 
the inn. Justin Martyr places*the. birth in a cave. The 
khan wld. probably remain for long time in the East. 
" Land and Book " 1,583; (Thomson quoted, Andrews 
81 ; Farrar I. 3-6; W. Hepworth Dixon's Holy Land, I, 



31 

ch. 13). Matt, makes no reference to the home, but speaks 
as if they came to it for first time. Lk. represents them 
as living there beforehand. Rationalists deny that lie 
was born in Beth., say that he was born in Naz. Strauss 
rejects both acc'ts. Kenan : " It is only by an awkward 
detour that the legend succeeds in fixing his birth at 
Beth." R. says that the royal line from D. had become 
extinct, but that Christ's birth must be fixed at Beth., 
bee. of prophecy. Ans. : (ct) The acc'ts are not contra- 
dictory but complemental. (b) Matt, calls attention to 
both places, simply to speak of the fulfillment of proph- 
ecy. Lk. gives the sequence of events. 

§8. Design of annunciation to Shepherds, Lk. 2: 17. 
Why announce his birth to them ? 1. That attention 
might be called to this birth, in the press of business. 
2. That witnesses, simple, competent, sufficiently numer- 
and disinterested, might see him. 3. This testimony 
must not be accomplished in too public a manner, in or- 
der not to foster the designs of Herod. 4. The attesta- 
tion is miraculous, by angels. 5. New connection is 
made with 0. T. hist, and types. These shepherds were 
feeding their flocks on the same hills where D., their 
father, had i'ed his. Christ, the new-born king, is typi- 
fied, who should feed his flocks like a shepherd. 

Lange finely heads this as " The first Gospel upon 
Earth." The sign (Lk. 2: 12) is not supernatural, hut 
sufficiently accurate, for among the children born that 
night in Beth., probably not more than one would have 
been in a manger. 3 ways of reading the doxology: 

(a) Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good- 

will toward men. 

(b) " " " in (among) the highest, and on earth 

peace, good-will toward men. 

(c) " " " in the highest and on Earth, peace 
among men of His good-will. 

Here we meet with one of the most imp. readings 
which materially affect the sense. The altered reading, 
among the men of His good-will is equivalent to the elect peo- 
ple. Valcknaer : " men with whom God is pleased." Thus 
we have the truth that eipyvq was given to Jews that 
through them it might be a joy rzavrl zw hiiv. Some con- 
trast ayyeAot and avOpionot. The latter come in, after the 



32 



former had completed their mission. Argued: that the 
publicity of this event ought to have prevented subse- 
quent unbelief. Ans. Lk. 16 : 31. Naturalistic theorists, 
to get rid of the supernatural, say that the Shepherds 
were aware of the condition of Mary ; they saw a bright 
light in the heavens, and mistook it for the glory of God. 
Mythical theorists (more naturally) : All this was looked 
for bee. of prophecy, which required the scene at Beth. 
Wherefore, subsequent writers embellish it with honor 
given to Christ. The Shepherds were related to Da-id, 
and therefore they were made use of more than other 
men. Strauss rejects the whole thing. 

§9. Circumcision and Presentation in the Temple. The 
chronological order of events here is called in question. 
By law, circumcision was on the eighth day, and presen- 
tation on the fortieth day. Now, where and when can 
be inserted " the adoration of the Magi" and " Flight to 
Egypt ? '"' 1. Tradition and ecclesiastical observance 
have placed them before the presentation. Obj. : Tra- 
dition not old enough. 2 Matt. 2 : 1 seems to imply 
that the adoration soon followed the birth. But if the 
argument proves anything, it proves that it was on night 
of birth. 3. Herod was ignorant of the birth until the 
arrival of the Magi ; but if presentation had occurred, 
he would have heard of it. This is merely gratuitous. 
He might have heard and paid no attention to it. The 
visit of the Magi awakened his suspicions, as they came 
from distant realms. 

Obj. : (1). Time inadequate. Forty days required be- 
tween birth and purification. This could not compre- 
hend the coming of the Magi and flight to Egypt. (2). 
Presentation could not have occurred subsequent to the 
slaughter of the Innocents. Even after Herod's death, 
when Joseph heard that Archelaus was in power, he was 
afraid to return. Matt. 2: 22-23. (a)Hengstenburg gets 
over this by translating " he went there with fear." 
(6) Ritual view puts presentation between Magi's visit 
and flight. But 1, it is expressly stated that the visit of 
Magi caused alarm in Jerusalem, and excited Herod's 
fears. 2. It separates between Magi's visit and flight, 
which Matthew connects as cause and effect. Hence, 
both prove fatal to the Ritualistic theory. 3. Robinson, 



33 

Schaff, &c, put presentation first. Obj.: Luke gives no 
return to Bethlehem, and implies the return to Nazareth 
to be immediately after presentation. 

Ans. : It is not a part of Luke's plan. He only main- 
tains the consistency of his own narrative. From Beth- 
lehem to Jerusalem only two hours journey, and there- 
fore unimportant to mention. Negative critics hold these 
two lines are contradictions, but harmonists that eacli 
narrative Hows on in its course, yet consistent, and form- 
ing one beautiful whole. 

Presentation in the Temple. — The design is four-fold. 1. 
Showed obedience to the law by purification of the Vir- 
gin and redemption of first born. Obj. : Jesus was a 
priest, and therefore it was illegal. Argument of no 
force, as Jesus was not a Levite to whom the law was 
prescribed. Hence Jesus rendered no formal service as 
redemption of first-born was necessary. 2. A new op- 
portunity for testimoin- to inspiration, given by Simeon 
and Anna. 3. It spread the report of his birth. 4. Re- 
cognition of the spiritual Israel. It is worthy of notice 
here, that these examples and testimonies are scattered 
the country over. Zachariah and Elizabeth in the south, 
Joseph and Mary in the north, Simeon and Anna at the 
metropolis. It is objected on the ground of discrepancy 
that ver. 24 gives the sacrifice as due from the mother, 
whiFe ver. 27 does not mention the redemption-money 
for the child. Every woman at purification presented a 
lamb and a dove for sacrifice, but in case of povertj 7 , an 
additional dove was substituted for the lamb. The latter 
having been made by Mary, betrays indigence. Ver. 22 
makes wjtcov refer to whom ? N"ot Joseph. But there is 
no difficulty in applying xa6apcafjLo r j to Jesus, because He 
represented His people. It is not positively stated that 
Simeon was far advanced in years. Some suppose he 
was Rabbin Simeon. Some interesting points just here. 

1. The fact of inspiration shown in the promise that 
he should see the Messiah. 2. The clear recognition in 
Simeon's words of the fact announced in the angelic dox- 
ologyofthe universal application of our Lord's work. 
3. Prophecy verified. 4. His sufferings foretold. These 
four points teach three things: (1). Rejection by the 
Jews. (2). Calling of the Gentiles. (3). His sacrificial 



34 

character. We also infer that tribal relations were not 
all lost, as Anna is mentioned as belonging to the tribe 
of Aser. Fasting and prayer to be understood literally 
and not of an ascetic order, as they simply mean Anna 
led a religious life. The sceptical objections here are lame. 
The Mythists assert that the motive for miracles in the 
narrative was a desire to exalt Christ on the part of later 
writers. This alone they say was the cause for the multi- 
plicity of miracles. 

§10. Adoration of the Magi. Matt. 2 : 1-12. According 
to the most approved plan, this belongs to verses 38-39 
ot'Lk. 2. Its signification is the counterpart of the last. 
The time after presentation was brief, as Herod's death 
soon followed. The adoration of the Magi represents 
His acknowledgment by the Gentiles. They could not 
have been Jews. Their question was, where is He who 
is born King of the Jews? The salient change in the 
church at this time was the calling of the Gentiles. N. T. 
dispensation is of grace, hence universal, and not an ac- 
cident of its condition, but an inward change hi the 
essential character of the dispensation. O. T. prepara- 
tory and honored in its being superseded. Care was 
taken that He did honor to the law — the 0. T. Like- 
wise in the fulfillment of prophecy and calling of the 
Gentiles. Christ was apprehended by the Magi as the 
king, and they tendered Him royal gifts. This custom 
common to the East. Divinely guided, hence it is nat- 
ural to infer that they cherished a real faith in the Son 
of God, but not so clear as was possible after the resur- 
rection. By some it is thought the gifts were significant. 

1. Gold significant of royalty, authority, sovereignty. 

2. Frankincense of prayer and intercession, thus recog- 
nizing him as the hearer and answerer of supplication. 

3. Myrrh, being a favorite anodyne and antiseptic, had 
reference to his suiferings and resurrection ; hence the 
incorruptibility of his nature, and the promise that his 
body should not see corruption. The mother accepted 
the gifts as His clue. Tradition has greatly embellished 
this event. The three donors represent three different 
races, viz : Shem, Ham, and Japheth. In pictures, one 
is represented as a negro. But more important than these 
traditionary views we shall observe 1. The Magi, called 



35 

fidyot o.tto avazolCov. Originally, a tribe of Medes set apart 
fur priests, same as the Levites among the Jews. They 
embodied the learning of the people. Their knowledge 
consisted principally of astrology. 2. The country of 
their abode the text leaves uncertain. Three have been 
given, Arabia, Mesopotamia, Persia. The last best. 
Notice the change from avaroAtov to mjaxohj. Both forms 
are used as definite geographical expressions. AuavoXwv 
is the far-east Persia. AvaroAy, east Babylonia. Observe 
the representatives of the race are chosen from the cradle 
of the race. The Greeks and Romans were too impure 
and familiar with the Jews, and treated them with con- 
tempt. Barbarians were too ignorant. The east chosen 
because the cradle of science. The writings of Zoroaster 
come nearer to the Holy Scriptures than any others. 3. 
What brought the Magi? Phenomena natural or super- 
natural? Prevailing belief, natural. To its being mi- 
raculous it is objected : [a) Nowhere taught in the text. 
(b) Magi saw the star in the East. If seen in the East it 
could not go before them. To remove this difficulty read 
ver. 2: " while we were in the East &c." (<•) They were 
uot led to X. but came to Him. Not guided to Bethlehem 
until they asked for the child. When directed again to 
Bui. they saw the star the second time. Popular tradition 
is that the star led them. Ans : Kepler the first to sug- 
gest the natural explanation in 1604. (See Andrews 
pp. 9-10). He observed in that year a conjunction 
of Jupiter and Saturn, in Pisces, in Dec. 1603. Mars was 
added in the following spring, and a new star of surpass- 
ing brilliancy appeared in the autumn of 1604. In 747 
A. U. C. there were three such conjunctions of Jupiter 
and Saturn,, and Mars was added in 748 A. L T . C. Both 
of these conjunctions have been supposed to be the star 
of the Magi. Rabbi Abarbanel states that the same thing 
occurred at the birth of Moses, and also in 1463, which 
led him to look for the birth of the Messiah in his own 
day. Wieseler says it was a new star in 749 and 750, 
and finds it recorded in the Chiuese annals. This clashes 
with Zumpt, whose theory is determined by the date that 
Cyrenius was governor of Syria, as previously stated. 
Ques : How is this star to be associated with X's birth? 
Ans : 1. They knew this was the part of the heavens 



36 

which belonged to Judea. 2. A prevailing expectation 
at the time for a Deliverer, who should appear in Judea. 
(Vide Suetonius and Tacitus). 3. Collateral traditions 
from common sources of knowledge. Chinese sages, 33 
years later, coming west, inquired for the long expected 
and common Saviour. 4. These were combined with 
Jewish expectations. Jews were scattered widely over 
the world, who spread knowledge of God and Messianic 
predictions. David and Daniel had prophesied of Him. 
In Kura. 24: 17 and Is. 60: 3, he is spoken of under 
the figure of a star. Mary applies 1ST. 24 : 17 to X. 
Balaam's words may have been handed down outside of 
the church. These passages may have given shape to 
astronomical expectations relative to X. Hence the Magi 
were naturally led to observe heavenly phenomena. 
Hengstenberg objects. 1. aorqp is applicable to only 
one body, and o.(7T[>ov to a constellation. The former is 
true, but the use of the latter is wide. 2. Kepler has 
been reviewed by Pritchard. He says conjunction in no 
case was perfect. The stars always separated by two 
diameters of the moon between. Ans: Still, the phe- 
nomenon was very remarkable as well as the coincidence 
of his calculations. The two planets came together about 
three hours and a half before sunrise, and hence in the 
East. The first appearance would be seen in the East 
May 20, 747, just before sunrise. The second in Xov. 
five months later in the south, at 8 P. M.: hence star ap- 
peared toward Bin. The former indicated the birth, 
the latter the way to Bin. This involves those who claim 
747 in all the chronological difficulty to which we have 
referred. Accordingly, the birth of X. is put three years 
earlier, and makes Him 33 years at Baptism. Therefore 
the Magi did not probably set out at the first appearance, 
but delayed some time. Again, the term of Quirinus 
was not earlier than 750, whereas this makes nativity 
three years before. But the taxing might have been four 
years earlier than 750. The only alternative for this 
naturalistic explanation is to adopt the theory of a new 
star, natural or miraculous. 3. Objections: Why should 
Herod slaughter 3 year old children ? As the first star 
was only five months before, therefore we must agree 
that star at Bm. was a new star or a miraculous one. 



37 

Milton supposes a leading of the rays; Dr. Pritchard the 
going and standing of the star was in consequence of the 
Mali's iournevino- and arrival ; Dr. Alexander that the 
words mean they saw the star again on the road to Bin. 
and thus confirmed their hopes, and hence it was a star 
seeming to go before them. 4. God would not use their 
false notions of astrology for such an end. Strauss asks, 
Is astrology wrong elsewhere but right in this case? 
Ans : God employs men as they are, bringing good out 
of evil. Also, astrology was then considered as associa- 
ted with all true astronomy. It embodied true science. 
Astrology and Alchemy embraced all that was known of 
science. There are perplexing difficulties either way. 
Still, the astrological phenomena must have given cor- 
roboration to the expectations for the Messiah. Observ- 
ed at the time of birth, and hence they furnish collateral 
evidence to the time of the nativity. 

Mythists assert the whole to be a myth. Arabian mer- 
chants befriended the parents in their poverty. The magi 
were fixed upon, as they were astronomers ; and star, be- 
cause of 0. T. passages referring to a great light, and 
which were literally understood. The gifts referred to 
Isaiah 60 : 6. 

As to the general effect, Herod and the city were trou- 
bled. The wise men of the Jews called and questioned, 
aud replied, " Christ was to be born in Bra." Mic. 5 : 2. 
Note the difference in reading between Micab and Matt. 
A striking illustration of two opposites meaning the 
same thing. Warned of God in a dream, the magi 
avoided Herod and returned home another way. 

§11. Flight into Egypt — Herod's Cruelty — The Return. 
Matt. 2 : 13-23. Besides saving the child's life, it sym- 
bolically embodies the great truth that the Messiah was 
to suffer. Hitherto all peaceful. Except poverty and 
humility, nothing as yet indicated His suffering. The 
design of the flight is five-fold. 1. To introduce the suf- 
fering element. 2. Christ's kingly office set forth. 
Princely honors bestowed. 3. 0. and IS". T. typical 
relations established. Egypt was a refuge, being near 
and under Roman power. Moses was saved there, where 
also was the transitional state of the church from the 
family to the nation. Church came up out of Egypt 



38 

when preserved. Now in clanger church repairs there 
again. Christ is saved. 4. In Egypt, Hos. 11:1 fulfil- 
led. Obj'n : misapplication. Ans : The calling of Israel 
from Egypt bears a typical relation to Christ. 5. New 
evidence of miraculous care observed for the child. Jo- 
seph conspicuous, as evidence for miraculous conception, 
and preservation. Hence he is too much underrated. 

Massacre of the Innocents. Objections : 1. Herod defeat- 
ed his purpose by inquiring of the Magi. Too cunning 
for this. Better accomplished by secret messenger, &c. 
2. Silence of contemporaneous history. Could such cru- 
elty escape notice ? No, say negative critics. Joseph us 
and Roman historians make no record of it. Answer : 
Whatever was unpleasant to Roman ears Josephus was 
careful to omit. Roman historians did not mention it 
because they had no sympathy with Jewish hist'y. Again, 
this was only as a drop in the bucket as compared with 
Herod's cruelties. Through jealousy he killed his wife 
and sons. When dying he issued orders to destroj 7 his 
nobles, that there might be weeping at his death. 

The wise men mocked Herod. Pride, ambition and 
fear caused him to kill all the male children, roue Tiacdat;. 
No mention of secrecy. From two years old and under 
cannot be limited to those beginning their second year, 
nor can it be said Christ was two years old. If the child 
had just been seen by the Magi, why those two yrs. old 
and under? Herod would have killed enough children 
without extending his order to those two years old. Ans. 
Prophecy was thus fulfilled, Jer. 31 : 15. Objected again 
that the prophecy is misapplied. Rachel is poetically 
represented as rising from the grave, owing to the depor- 
tation of captives at Raman, the descendants of Jos. and 
Benj. Here as rising to weep for the massacre of the 
innocents at Bm. Ans. : Typical connection between 
the two events. As to the number of children slaugh- 
tered, sceptics exaggerate. Voltaire says 14,000. Anti- 
quarians estimate the population by measurement of 
space. This necessarily is liable to mislead. Variously 
estimated about 90, 10, or 12. Smallest most probable. 

Mythists, &c, say all heroic persons passed through 
dangers during infancy and childhood. Romulus, Remus, 
Cyrus, &c. Hence the eventful infancy of Christ, or, it 






39 

was a pure invention to connect it with Moses and Heb'ws 
in Egypt. The place of sojourn is unknown. Traditions 
clash. Some, near Heliopolis ; others, at Memphis. 
Nor is the duration of the sojourn fully known. Varies 
as the date of birth by different critics. The return was 
soon after Herod's death, as Jos. had not heard of his 
successor. We may note Math. 'a agreement with con- 
temporaneous hist. Period of intricate changes, yet no 
mistake is made. Herod's territory divided into three 
parts. Herod Antipas, tetrarch over Galilee and Perea; 
Archelaus : Judea, Idumea and Samaria. Herod had 
appointed Archelaus king, but Augustus allowed him the 
title of Ethnarch. Philip was allotted Trachonitis, Au- 
ranites. The gospel narrative moves through all these 
without a single blunder. 

It was Joseph's intention to return to Bm. Warned 
in a dream to return again to Nazareth. Prophecy ful- 
filled, Jud. 13 : 5. That Nazareth is never mentioned in 

0. T. is based partly on the etymology of the word. Sup- 
posed to be from a Heb. word meaning a twig ; others 
from a word signifying a crown. Allusion to Is. 11 : 1 
compared with 53 : 3. Messiah to be a twig from the 
prostrate stem of Jesse, i. e., of humble origin. There 
is reference to the reputation of the town. " Can any 
good come out of Nazareth ?" Christ fulfilled prophecy 
by living there. The return and settlement at Nazareth 
close the period of infancy. 

The peculiarities of this first subdivision of the prepar- 
atory period are heightened by the silence that followed. 

1. Matt, and Lk. combine to form a unit, fitting like a lock 
and key. 2. The supernatural and historical elements 
are one. If miracles, they must be received on historical 
evidence. Bleek says Christians cannot but expect 
Christ's entrance into the world accompanied by peculiar 
signs. 3. The attempt to discredit is based on subjective 
and rationalistic grounds, i. e., difficulty to believe, vary- 
ing with the individual. Critics argue in circulo. The 
choice is between Matt, and Strauss. 4. The historical 
characteristics already justified in connecting with 0. T. 
The typical and symbolical exhibited, and facts imply 
and embody truths, which were brought out. 

Second Subdivision of Preparatory Period.— Its limits com- 
prise the return and end of 30 years of quiet life at Naz- 



40 

areth, or settlement at Nazareth to commencement of 
ministry. Profound silence. No uninspired writer could 
refrain from his own interpolations. Hence the contrast 
between apocrypha and N. T. Design of the silence. 
1. Essential to have a full account of Christ's origin, his 
ministry, public work and sacrifice. To this the gospels 
correspond. 2. Period of growth, not work. Just enough 
presented to maintain hist, connection. Silence a check 
upon those who would dwell on unimportant truths. 
More would have been gratification of curiosity to which 
sacred historians never descend. Otherwise the narrative 
would be impaired. 3. Such given as adds to our ideas 
of Christ. Two extremes to be avoided : (a) That Christ 
learned nothingin a natural way, but all supernatural, even 
to reading and writing. This view unwarranted by facts, 
and unnecessary to his divinity, (b) Naturalistic. This 
exalts his mental powers to the exclusion of the divine. 
This untrue, as the people wondered at his wisdom, hav- 
ing never learned. Narrative says " he taught not as one 
taught by the scribes." He probably lived and learned 
as other boys. Supposed to have learned his father's 
trade. Mk. 6 : 3. See Dr. Alexander. 

Gospel Lessons. — 1. Early life uneventful. 2. Growth, 
not action. Grew in wisdom and stature. 3. He grew 
in favor with unbelieving Galileans, who knew him best. 
His brethren the most difficult to persuade, and his 
townsmen sought twice to kill him. They were scan- 
dalized by his assuming superiority. There was no 
unnatural and repulsive precocity in him. He possessed 
a perfect human nature. Early Fathers say he had no 
personal beauty, based on Is. 53 : 2. Later view founded 
on Ps. 45. 4. The most important is the following : 

§12. Visit to the Passover.— Lk. 2:41-52. This^single 
paragraph presents the fact of his extraordinary powers. 
Were it not for this, there would be room for the asser- 
tion that Christ received no miraculous gift till Baptism. 
The event marks a transition in his consciousness. The 
growing boy, full of heavenly wisdom, seeking after 
knowledge, kind to his parents, obedient in all things. 
Olshausen beautifully says, " He was a perfect boy, per- 
fect man." A marked arrival of fuller consciousness of 
his mission is also noticeable. Impressed with his desti- 



41 

ny. In analogy with human experience. Christ had a 
child knowledge of himself. Now a youth's experience, 
then the sudden mental changes, of which a youth is 
often conscious. Hence glimpses of a portentous future. 
How or when came to Jesus the consciousness of his 
Messiahship we are not told. It must have been gradual. 
A sinless being, with a knowledge of sin, yet pure, and 
conscious of difference between himself and others. 
Reading the law, and yet having perfect love to God ; 
the types and prophecies of O. T. and conscious of their 
fulfillment in himself. A gradual conception of his Mes- 
sianic character must have been wrought in him. There 
are evident traces however, when touching upon great 
truths, of modern flashes gleaming in upon his soul. 
This is one, and those at Baptism and on Mt. of Trans. 

At this point the " Lives of Christ " open themselves. 
The authors show what is to be their theory of the per- 
son of X., upon which they explain the events of his life. 
Rationalists deny or explain away the supernatural. 
Orthodox writers vary. It is important to know the 
author's standpoint, and guard against misinterpretation 
of forms of statement. Ebrard, Pressense, and Beecher 
explain by the xev watQ theory, which is a self-limitation, 
or self-emptying of the Logos. Divine and human one 
and the same. Not two natures, but one. Distinction 
made between essential nature and attributes. X. was 
God essentially and potentially, but emptied himself of 
his Divine contents. A babe like any other babe. Void 
of ideas, was a bundle of germs which developed through- 
out his whole life, and at exaltation his Divinity fully 
restored. The human developed into the Divine ; the 
Infinite having become finite, and the finite growing back 
into the Infinite. This theory denies the real humanity 
of X., robs him of human sympathy. X. is an undeified 
God. 

Others lower X's humanity by separating it too much 
from his divinity. He possessed all of our humanity, 
but the converse is not true. Hence his was not ours, 
but his own. Yet ours touches his. For this view, two 
reasons. 1. He was sinless, therefore his capacities un- 
like ours. We do not know what sinless humanity is. 
2. He was Divine, and two natures in his person, there- 



42 

fore above us. All he did was not as a mere man, The 
human influenced by the divine, and hence all hedidwas 
done by God. Illustration: A Christian is exalted, 
owing to the indwelling of the H. G. So X., though a 
man, is exalted, by a personal union with the Father and 
H. G. Hence as a man is infinitely above any other 
man. Paul maintains this in Hebrews, as the ground of 
the infinite value of his sacrifice. It is possible to so 
view X. as to conceive of him as sustaining a double per- 
sonality. Most of the " Lives of Christ " are based on 
German theories, largely tainted with this speculation. 
This is growing common with the Baptists. We study 
him not merely as coinciding with our views of his 
nature, but as a true man, developing according to his 
nature, acting and acted upon. 

Jesus went up to the temple with his parents. At 12 
Jewish boys became " sons of the law," and took part in 
the feasts &c. The country was safe from former dan- 
gers. When X was about 10, Archelaus was banished 
to Gaul. The government in the hands of procurators, 
subordinate to governor of Syria, and thus Galilee, Sama- 
ria and Judea were under Roman protection. The 
parents returned from Passover but Jesus stayed behind. 
They had proceeded a day's journey before they missed 
him, thinking he was with his kinsmen. Failing to dis- 
cover his whereabouts, they returned to the city. Found 
him the third day at the temple, "sitting in the midst of the 
doctors." " Sitting" does not necessarily imply equality. 
Strauss says it is unnatural that a boy of 12 should be 
instructing men, that a. scholar would have stood. "Hear- 
ing and asking' 1 imply instructing. Ans : Xothing in 
the narrative inconsistent with an intelligent boy, pure 
and curious for knowledge. Scholar standing was not 
customary. The mother's question shows their mutual 
relation. It is beautiful, rexvov, re inor/jcraz tJ/mv burcoz ; 
The reply is variously interpreted. The grammar admits 
of two. Some supply ellipsis locally — "Why did you 
look elsewhere, did you not know I would be in my 
Father's house ?" Better : " in my Father's affairs." 
and thus at the Temple, as the article is indefinite. The 
first recorded words of X., and an acknowledgment of 
God as his Father. Others affirm that at this juncture 



43 

the consciousness of his destiny became move real. Pre- 
viously he had been passive, but not so now. Best 
humanitarians claim the words are expressive of penetra- 
ting insight into his divine mission. We may remark 
that the incident serves to enhance our interest occasion- 
ed b} T his miraculous birth. The parental anxiety, inquiry 
for a lost child, public place where he was found, were 
all calculated to arouse thoughts in the parent's minds. 

Critical Objections. 1. Unnatural that his mother should 
lose him. Ans • He was old enough to take care of him- 
self. Easily lost in a large crowd. 2. Unnatural that, he 
should cause his mother so great anxiety, and then give 
her such a reply. Ans : Reply not rough, but a gentle 
admonition that her claims were subordinate to a higher 
duty. 3. If the circumstances of conception were true, 
the mother could not fail to comprehend his answer. 
Ans : Mary may not have fully known what he meant. 
12 years could have glided by with nothing extraordina- 
ry. Hence the origin of the Mythical interpretation, 
based on Moses and Samuel. From the narrative, we 
learn that he returned to Nazareth and was subject to 
his parents. 

Joseph's death. Supposed to have died soon after this. 
Not mentioned again. Apocryphal gospels say he died 
when Jesus was 19. Evidently dead at the time of cru- 
cifixion, as Jesus gave his mother into John's care. 

Why Nazareth chosen as abode? 1. To fulfill prohecy. 
2. It was his parents' home. 3. It afforded safety. 
Greater danger in Jerusalem. 4. Could gain more influ- 
ence in Galilee than in Jerus. under the Pharisaic eye. 
5. Isolated from Jewish instruction, he is supposed to 
have been taught of God. His wisdom given by inspira- 
tion. 6. Reared where the scenes of his public ministry 
were to be chiefly laid. Renan: "The whole Galilean 
ministry was within sight of his youthful home." Pres- 
ent Nazareth consists of 3000 inhabitants. It lies in a 
narrow valley, shut in between two rocks. North of the 
Esdraelon plain, the hill looks n. e. to Hermon. There- 
fore the view was familiar to him when looking towards 
the snow-capped Hermon, the northernmostpoint of X's 
work. The eastern view confronted by Tabor, west 
by Carmel and the sea. The southern by Gilboa and 
Samaria. 



44 

§13. Genealogies. Mth. 1 : 1-17; Lk. 3 : 23-38. The 
importance of these lies in the necessity to prove X's 
Messianic claims. The Jewish genealogies were sacredly 
kept and open to all. Strauss considers them fraudulent, 
and that they involve difficulties, being opposed to 0. T. 
Hence no proof of Christ's Davidic descent, 1. On the 
contrary, the royal line could not be obscure. People 
would have guarded the royal seed as He was to descend 
from David. This was the promise. If Christ had been 
of Davidic descent, he would have been hailed as Mes- 
siah. Ans : No theocratic rulers on account of sin. 2. 
Birth at Bm. was not generally believed, nor does Jesus 
reply to this. John 7: 42. ANazarene,andso hepassesin 
Gospels and Acts. Ans : Nowhere else charged, not in 
Sanhedrim. Were the charge substantial, it would have 
been fatal to him. He was not ignorant of his lineage, 
as he calls himself David's son. Peter at Pentecost, the 
Acts and Epistles use it. Strauss says title is officially 
no real fact. 3. No concurrent testimony, no reference 
to Ebionites. Ans: Abundant proof without the gene- 
alogies. u The son of" or " begat" not limited to literal 
relationship of father and son. This true when line runs 
out. This remark clarities Mth.'s genealogy. Remote 
ancestors called fathers when distinct line vanishes. 
Case: Math, says "Jacob begat Joseph." Lk., "Joseph 
was the son of Heli." No literalness here. Again, Mth. 
speaks of three divisions of fourteen genealogies each. 
Difficulty. But the most obvious way to remove it is to 
count David twice. Another difficulty. In second table 
four kings omitted which Chronicles supplies, thus mak- 
ing eighteen generations instead of fourteen. Therefore 
" so all the generations" must mean all given in Mth. 
Charge of ignorance absurd, as every child in Judea 
knew the royal list better than we do the Presidential, 
or the royal line of Gt. Britain. But why fourteen ? 1. To 
aid memory. 2. Symbolic value of the number of letters, 
which were fourteen. David=14. D\ V 6 , D 4 = 14. 3. 
Periods chronologically equal. Untrue, because the first 
period is twice as long as the other two. 4. These 
periods of national history. This the most satisfactory, 
i.e., the theocratic descent. What names omitted and 
why ? Amaziah, Joash and Ahaziah, occurring between 



45 

Joram and Ozias. Some say because they descended 
from Jezebel, and others because they were mere ciphers. 
Jehoiachim omitted as captivit\ T began in his reign, or 
because made king by a foreign power. Objection to 
Mth. 1: 11. Jechonias had no brethren. Ans: Breth- 
ren may mean contemporaries. Again Jechonias had no 
children, hence not the father of Salathiel. "Write the 
man childless." Jer. 22 : 23. Perhaps this meant he 
should lack in a direct line of successors to the throne. 
All these little difficulties sufficiently accounted for. 

Discrepancies between Mth. and Lk. 1. Mth's genealogy 
opens the narrative and was probably copied. Lk's is 
introduced as a part of X's personal' history. 2. Mth. de- 
scends while Lk. ascends. 3. Math, traces the royal line, 
Lk. the natural to Adam. 4. Lk. fuller than Mth., giv- 
ing 42 names to Mth's 28. To David the lists agree. 
Difficulty : Between Salmon and David only three names 
occur for 400 or 500 years. Same dif. in Ruth, and 
hence another instance of contradiction. Ans : Names 
omitted. Said thatRahab was another line than Jewish. 

Divergence of lineage from David downward. Mth. fol- 
lows Solomon. Lk. Nathan. Two hypotheses : 1. Both 
Mth. and Lk. give Joseph's genealogy. 2. Mth. that of 
Joseph and Lk. Mary's. (1) current before Reformation, 
and now supported by many of the best critics, viz. Alford, 
Meyer, &c. (2) held by Wieseler, Ebrard, Greswell, 
Alexander, &e. If both of Joseph, why different? Ans: 
One through kings the other from father to son. How 
snme names in two different lines, e. £. Salathiel and 
Zorobabel ? Ans : 1. Two persons with same name. 
2. A mere coincidence. Lines together in Salathiel, as 
direct line runs out and Sal. nearest heir. This explains 
how Jechonias is Salathiel's father, while Lk. makes 
Salathiel son of Xeri. Main obj : If both Joseph's, 
they only establish X's legal right to the throne, but no 
personal descent. Ans : Some say this was all that was 
required. But prophecv does not allow this as it is too 
definite. Compare 2 Sam. 2 : 12 and Acts 2 : 20 ; 13 : 23. 

Hypothesis of Jos. and Mary. First cousins relieves the 
objection. Grandfather of both one and the same per- 
son : Matthat and Matthan. Matthan had two sons. 
Heli and Jacob. Hence Jos. and Marv were first-cousins — 



46 

of Davidic origin. M. had sisters, but no mention of 
brothers. Tradition says M. was a ward of Jos. Thus 
a partial relief afforded if genealogies be of Jos. They 
give X's right to the throne personally and officially. Ob- 
jections against Lk's giving Mary's : 1. Female line not 
recorded. Ans : This not female, but genealogy of 
woman through her father, and thus the male line of M'3 
ancestry. 2. M. and Eliz. were cousins, and Eliz. of 
unroyal line, hence M. not of royal line. Ans : This 
could be on mother's side. Intermarriage allowed among 
the tribes. 3. M's name not mentioned in Lk's genealogy, 
but purports that of^Jos. Ans: This not easily over- 
come, yet not absolutely fatal to the theory, as Lk. says, 
"who was supposed to be the son of," &c. 4. No other 
proof that M. was from David. Ans: Untrue — proved 
outside of genealogies that Christ was of royal line, which 
confirms the probability that list was M's. Lk. 1 : 31-32. 
This prior to marriage and thus necessary that the child 
should have a voluntary father. This the light in which 
she could understand her union with Jos. if she were of 
the house of David. Lk. 1 : 27. David may refer to the 
principal subject, as well as to the nearest antecedent, 
i. e. Jos. M. went to Bm. to enrol her name the same 
as Jos. Lk. 2: 4. So far then as she was not from 
Levitic genealogy, proofs contrary. All texts which 
prove Christ to be from David also prove the same for M. 

This subject is beset with difficulties. Slight mistakes 
destroy certainty. Genealogical principles unknown to 
us. Much has been cleared up which critics deemed 
insurmountable, and hence reasonable to suppose that 
coming researches will remove all difficulties. (See 
Smith's Diet., Arthur Harvey, and Dr. Green on Colenso.) 

§14. History of John the Baptist Mth. 3: 1-13; Mk. 
1: 1-8; Lk. 8: 1-18. Ministry of John and Tempt, 
introduced Christ's public work. Lk. begins Iry formal 
transition of six dates. Mth. and Mk. begin with preach- 
ing of the Baptist. Prophecy groups the Baptism and 
entrance upon public work. Predictions of Malachi are 
now fulfilled. John began to preach in 749. a Sabbatical 
year by best chronology, which relieved the people from 
labor and thus afforded them leisure to attend John's 
ministry. " The word of the Lord came to John in the 



47 

wilderness," given to commence work directly, and hence 
he was inspired and divinely guided. Rationalists say 
this was useless, that John had a conviction that he was 
a man of God, and, seeing the condition of the people, 
undertook the work of reformation. But the scriptures 
show he was under divine guidance. 

Design of John's Ministry. — 1. Preparation for Christ. 
John represented O. T. economy, and was the last and 
greatest of 0. T. prophets, being an embodiment of its 
spirit. Hence first design was to announce New Dispen- 
sation. Popular belief in external kingdom, which John 
proposed to remove. 2. Preparation of people by repen- 
tance. 0. T. economy educated religious life without 
satisfying it and the people to expect the Messiah. But 
the majority of the people had lost the spiritual import 
of prophetic teaching. The Saddncees were sceptical 
and Pharisees self-righteous. The earnest Essenes had 
become fanatics. Hence the necessity of repentance to 
restore the spiritual, so that Christ might come in con- 
tact with 0. T. religion in revived life and power, and 
not an effete religion. 3. To point out the Messiah in 
the person of Jesus of Nazareth, and hand over to Christ 
the O. T. Dispensation. " This was He of whom," &c. 
4. To show both dispensations united in Christ, that the 
old yielded to him and withdrew. 

John accomplished his designs, first by preaching. No 
new doctrine, but a return to the power and spirit of the 
O. T. Its character was severe, denunciatory, and replete 
with chreatenings of wrath. Abounded in 0. T. figures. 
Points out specific sins. Calls all to repentance, but. 
never inculcates asceticism, yet wants them to observe 
the purity represented by it. Points to Christ as the 
lamb of God, advances upon Isaiah by pointing to the 
individual. His preaching more weighty because of the 
purity of his life. Personally fitted to revive O. T. relig- 
ion, representing the formal and spiritual. 

Design further shown by the rite of baptism. The 
people were wont to connect the spiritual with the sym- 
bolical. Baptism something" new, not associated with the 
law. Its significance was the washing away of their sins, 
a restoration of the spiritual. John charged with having 
learned his baptism from the form of receiving prose- 



48 

lytes. Ans : As an initiatory rite of Judaism it did not 
assume form until after the destruction of the temple. 
He received it from the washings of the 0. T. 

John's relations to 0. T. 1. By birth, being of priestly 
origin. 2. By his fulfilment of Malachi's prophecy, 3:1, 
and Isa. 40 : 3. 3. By the place he frequented, viz., the 
Desert of Judea, or, as Lk. says, "the region round about 
Jordan," i. e. between mountains, lower Jordan and the 
Dead Sea. Boundary crossed where Israel entered Ca- 
naan. Symbolical of the moral and religious destitution 
of the people. So regarded in O. T. Hence John lived 
unlike his master, who sought men at their own homes. 
He must be found in the wilderness. His personal 
appearance was peculiar. Dress made of the cheapest 
and coarsest material, and had earners hair which is shed 
yearly. But this raiment was not official, only assumed 
by Elijah and John to symbolize renouncement of ease 
and luxury. In 2 Kings 1 : 8 Elijah called a " hairy 
man." Comp. Zech. 13 : 4. Hence our conclusion. His 
food was locusts and wild honey. The nearest at hand. 
All these things were fit to mark him as a representative 
of O. T. dispensation. 

Was John's preaching merely negative? Was his 
repentance a saving grace? Did baptism cleanse or 
simply symbolize ? Rationalists affirm that, repentance 
meant renouncing of sin outwardly. Some orthodox 
writers say no vitality in John's work. Answer: John 
taught all the grace and power of 0. T. Hence real re- 
pentance and faith, as far as 0. T. exhibited. He vindi- 
cated the relation between O. and N. T. " I baptize 
with," &c. Further said baptism was a mere external 
ceremony ; others make the contrast between John and 
Christ, " I baptize in dependence upon him who," &c. 
Best: ~No allusion to Christian baptism as an ordinance. 
Eminent authorities hold this view. Christian baptism 
not yet established. Meaning then, " I baptize ceremo- 
nially with efficacy." Proposed to the people's faith — 
" He shall pour out the Spirit," Thus the distinction is 
in degree and not in kind. " He shall .... with fire:" 

1. Reference to judgment tire. Next clause, "chaff", &c." 

2. Purifying fire. Drs. Alexander and Schaff. Better: 
Holy Ghost, and therefore zeal. 



49 

The popular success of John was immense. Jerusalem 
emptied itself to t he banks of the Jordan. Judea, Sama- 
ria and Galilee gathered there. Priests, scribes, lawyers 
and soldiers, all conditions thronged to hear him. Yet, 
success not enduring, as the masses only received him 
formally. His power enhanced by his peculiar position, 
as a voice from the desert. Had he preached in Jerusa- 
lem it is said he would have been powerless. 

§15. The Baptism of Jesus. — Matt. 3 : 13, 14 ; Mk. 1 : 
9-11; Lk. 3 : 21-23. John began six months before. 
Christ now ready to be brought before the excited crowd. 
It was the design of Christ's journey, to be baptized. 
" Too ftax-tad/jVac, " which denotes purpose. The act 
anomalous, that the less should bless the greater. Matt, 
says John felt this and tried to hinder him. Christ's 
words peculiar: suffer now. Two things implied in them : 
1. Something was to be allowed, suffered, although unu- 
sual. 2. Seemingly temporary. "Suffer it to be so now?' 
It is Tiftszov, seemly to complete the law's obligation, 
what is right in a specific sense for the fulfillment of 
redemption. The refusal of John shows : 1. John knew 
and believed Jesus to be the Messiah. 2. Was subordi- 
nate, did as Christ commanded him. John baptized on 
Christ's authority. What was the design? As John's 
baptism involved confession of sin, what relation did 
Christ's bear to this ? 1. Strauss: Confession of sin 
actual. 2. Others, it implied peccability, and hence 
Lange, it was ceremonial unclean ness. Too narrow a 
view. 3. Schenkel says it means sympathy with others. 
4. True view. As the circumcision, it was expressive of 
his assumption of his people's sins. In the law's view he 
was a sinner, and therefore exhibited the necessity of the 
washing away of the sins assumed. As Messiah he was 
sin-bearer. Objection to last : Jesus confounded with 
the people ; they made confession, and might infer Christ 
did likewise for his own sins. Guarded : Lest they might 
think so, the divine and John's testimony intervened. 
The design is again shown as manifesting the unity of 
the two dispensations. The chief representatives of each 
meet. The 0. T. covenant baptizes the !N". T. covenant, 
Christ publicly gives authority to the work of John, and 
John confesses Christ to be superior to himself. John 
decreased, Christ increased. 



50 

Baptism served to inaugurate the work of Christ. Af- 
forded opportunity to God to recognize his Son. This 
was the chief import of the baptism — \qjo r j fiaTZTtafivjzo*, 
the genitive absolute, Lk. 3: 21. Main subjects the mi- 
raculous manifestations. Divine attestations necessary 
to the Messiah's coming. Wherefore Christ's arrival 
delayed till a great concourse had flocked to John. 

At Baptism Christ was anointed for his work by the 
Spirit. Not only formal, but full of vital power. The 
person of Christ is acted upon. Holy Ghost the agent 
in making him a tit place for the indwelling of the Logos. 
John's baptism represented cleansing from sin which is 
the Spirit's work. In the case of Christ the gift con- 
firmed by a sign of the Spirit's descent. The sign and 
descent go together. Lk. says " Jesus was praying" — a 
religious act, a real communication of the Spirit to Jesus. 
After baptism is the temptation, the trying of his gift. 
Conjecture: Christ now for the first time realizes his 
mission, the full consciousness of his sacrificial character. 
Ans : It is not given to penetrate so deeply into the mind 
of Christ. Certain : He did advance in knowledge of an 
important spiritual crisis. Always full of the Spirit 
sufficiently for his purposes, but now receives it immea- 
surably for his public ministry. Had it before in kind, 
not in degree, as now he is the organ of the Holy Ghost. 

As a dove. 1. Motion of the dove — gliding. 2. 
Quickness. 3. Softness of the dove. But these are in- 
consistent with what Lk. says, otofmrc/ti ei'dee ; hence an 
appearance, a bodily shape, real dove shape, if language 
means anything. Why dove ? 1. Reference to O. T. 
after the deluge. 2. Brooding, symbolical of new crea- 
tion. 3. Purity. 4. Symbol of sacrifice, ceremonial 
associations. (3) and (4) combined the best. Represented 
the whole spirit of his ministry. 1. The salvation he 
preached was peaceful, pure and lovely. 2. A sacrificial 
work. 3. Productive agenc^y of Spirit at creation — 
brooding dove. Difficulty : Mth. 3 : 16— " the heavens 
were opened cvjtw— to him ;" Mk. 1 : 10— u He saw the 
heavens, &c.;" John 1 : 32 — " I saw," i. e., John Bap. 
Hence the Baptist must have seen the Spirit himself. 
Ans : 1. This was the sign by which he could recognize 
Christ, Van Oosterzee considers the event as private, 



51 

and Spirit seen only by John and Christ. Ohj : a. Nat. 
inter, deny the objective reality of the phenomena. The 
vision became so only in the spiritual world, and for the 
spiritualized, b. Discrepancy in the several accounts. 
Mth. and Mk. say " Jesus saw ;" John — Baptist " saw;" 
while Lk. is general — " heaven opened and Spirit de- 
scended." 2. Dramatic representations, in the reconcilia- 
tion between 0. and N. T. Voice from heaven not con- 
fined to John and Jesus alone. " My beloved Son " 
founded on 2 Sam. 7: 12. But the expression does not 
imply that he became Son at baptism, because of his 
eternal relationship. Ps. 2 : 25, 42 and " In whom I am 
pleased" from Is. 42. Lange says aorist, denoting an 
eternal act; Alexander — a definite act. The last best. 

In this expression we have another attestation to 
Christ's Messiahship. This is the revelation of the Trinity 
in their personal agency in redemption. The first in 
conception. The Father at baptism declares the Son's 
Messiahship and the Spirit gives grace for the office. 
Minor differences in form of expressions made a subject 
of cavil. Mth: "This is my, &c" whilst Mk. and Lk. 
<k Thou art, &c." Some think both are proper and that 
there were two utterances from heaven. Words were 
doubtless in Hebrew or Aramaic and here in an inspired 
translation. 

Objections: — 1. Shortness of time. If John began six 
months before there was not time enough for his success 
and influence. Ans : John's work not independent but 
an appendage to Christ's. Results accounted for by the 
condition and great state of expectancy of the Jews. 
Strauss makes John to have begun when about 20 years 
old, long before Christ came to him. 2. Inconsistency 
between John and Syn. Syn. say John knew Jesus whilst 
John says the Baptist did not know him. Again John 
represents the Bap. as recognizing Christ as the Messiah 
from the first, whereas Syn. affirm that he sent a deputa- 
tion to Jesus from prison, saying " Art thou he that 
should come?" Strauss says John's gospel belongs to a 
later period, that John would not have said the "Lamb 
of God" as yet because he did not know him as the suf- 
fering Messiah. Had he understood him, he would have 
baptize'! him and given up his work. Ans: In baptiz- 



52 

ing, John obeyed. Strauss again : If the miraculous 
conception were true, Christ had no need of the Spirit at 
this time, and hence the event is a myth. A^ain : John 
an Essene, and he baptized and lived as the Essenes did. 
This gives a historical root of Christianity. John Bap- 
tist and Essenism are the germs of Christianity. John 
saw the necessity of a moral reformation, and if the peo- 
ple could be aroused, the Messiah would appear, and 
hence he proclaimed time for repentance had arrived. 
But John according to Strauss never acknowleged Jesus 
as Messiah. Later, Christ is baptized and indoctrinated 
into Messianic ideas. Jesus possessed a freer and clearer 
nature than John, and felt a lack in John's negative 
method. Hence he realized all those graces of his nature 
which resulted from his communion with God, and which 
were unattainable by ascetic methods. They looked upon 
each other as other teachers did. Strauss has three 
mythical stages of growth: 1. Church idea of the dignity 
of Jesus required that John should acknowledge his 
Messiahship. 2. Lk.'s story of his childhood. 3. John's 
account of a clear acknowledgment of Christ by the Bap- 
tist from the first. Strauss' canon : That account which 
tends to exalt the person of Christ is the mythical one. 
This rules out John's narrative altogether of the Baptist's 
recognition of Christ from the first. The remainder of 
John's gospel is assumed. 

The residuum : 1. TFie relation of John to the Essenes, 
who were entirely different. Essenes were dualistic. 
Enjoined asceticism upon all, John on himself. 2. The 
ascetic washings were not baptisms but oft repeated. 
John's once for all. 3. Strauss: John founded a sect. 
Ans : Untrue, but called the whole nation to repentance. 
Asceticism taught purity consisted in mortification, but 
receivers of John's baptism did not belong to any such 
school. 4. It involves a long continuation of Christ 
with John which is inadmissible. Renan : Christ more 
independent than John. Before Christ came, John had 
formed a full idea of reformation. Likewise Christ had 
deferred doing good until he had seen John and improved 
ou him. Schenkel says Christ and John were antagon- 
istic. Christ at first sympathized with John, but after- 
wards regarded his influence injurious. Baptism of Christ 



53 

only a transaction in his soul, which he conceived to be his 
divine mission, and hence separated from John. Keim 
holds it was purely humanitarian. Relates with rever- 
ence. Christ merely a man. Outward signs unreal, hut 
baptism a consecration to a work which John had begun. 

§16. The Temptation. — This is a great mystery, as it 
involves the doctrine of his person. Follows baptism. 
Hengstenberg holds that there is not room enough in 40 
days for Bap. and Tempt. 

Designs : 1. Typical. The heads of the Messianic and 
evil kingdoms brought face to face. Jesus, full of the 
Spirit, is subjected to a trial of strength with Satan, and 
triumphs in the complete overthrow of his adversary. 
Tempt, recalls the history of redemption, that of a conflict 
between the kingdoms of light and darkness. "Seed of 
the woman" in O. T. now fulfilled. Christ overcomes 
for his people, therefore, in connection with baptism and 
before his life work. 2. Had Messianic designs, (a) It 
formed a part of Christ's humiliation, (b) All the temp- 
tations proposed false views of the Messianic work. 
What could be accomplished only through suffering, 
Christ is urged to do at once by unlawful means. 3. 
Personal reference to his own inward experience. Spends 
forty days in prayer and lasting, and thus by outward 
means he was prepared for his work. 4. Exemplary. It 
shows ns how to triumph, by prayer, fasting and the Holy 
Scriptures. Christ's practical sermon on " Resist the 
devil and he will flee from you." A complete circle of 
temptations, addressed to his whole nature, so that he 
was tempted " in all points like as we." 

"Led by the Spirit." 1. His own mind. 2. The 
devil. 3. The Holy Spirit. Probably the last who led 
him to conquest over Satan in the wilderness. The desert 
was the Quarantania mountain near Jericho. ' ; With 
wild beasts" indicates a contrast with Adam's situation. 
" Forty days fasting" has O. T. associations. Obj : Im- 
possible — too long a time. Ans : 1. Supernatural power. 
2. Power of spirit over body exalted to an eminent degree 
in Christ. 3. Abstinence only from ordinary nourish- 
ments. Lk. 4: 2: oux iipaytv, thus making his abstinence 
total. Typical import in the number forty. Moses in- 
terceded for his people forty days; punishment consist- 



54 

eel of forty strikes; Ninevites fasted forty days, Ezekiel's 
sin-bearing forty days, and purification same length. 
Hence connected with confession of sin. Mth. and Lk. 
differ. One puts tempt, at the end of forty days, the 
other says he was tempted all the time. Most natural 
explanation that he was tempted in thought. 

Character of the Temptations. I. " If thou be the Son 
of God" refers to God's words at baptism. Satan wants 
proof. " Command these stones, &c." Stones numer- 
ous, a. Tempt, to gluttony. Improbable, because to 
eat bread after forty days fasting would not be gluttony. 
b. Tempt, to distrust Providence, and escape suffering 
inseparable from the character and mission which he as- 
sumed. Not exclusively applicable to Christ. His suf- 
ferings were representative. Jews 'looked for the Mes- 
siah as an embodiment of plenty to supply their wants. 
(See feeding of 5000.) Wherefore Christ was tempted 
to do by one stroke what was to result from his death 
and universal law of love among men. Ans : Deut. 8 : 3. 
Misinterpreted as referring to truth. No reference to 
truth but to manna, as truth can not feed the body. Idea : 
Man must look to God to supply all his wants, not 
primarily either to ordinary or extraordinary means. 

II. Directly opposed to the first. A presumptuous dis- 
trust in God. As if Satan said, '-If God is to support 
you, try hirn." Imitates Christ by quoting Ps. 91 : 11- 
12. Tizepujcov zou leoou. a. Roof of Solomon's porch. 
b. Royal porch, c. Double pitch of roof like wings, d. 
Wins:, as we use it, He is urged to forego suffering. 
Again Christ takes suffering as the appointed means to 
fulfill his mission. He quotes Deut. 6: 16. Double 
meaning. (1.) Thou shouldst not tempt me who am 
your sovereign. (2.) I should tempt God by so doing. 

III. " All kingdoms." Not Palestine. Did Satan own 
the world ? Then he had a right to give. Called and is 
the prince of this world. The world and Messiah antag- 
onistic. Not Christ's kingdoms now, though they are 
one day to be Christ's. Falseness of his claim lay in 
regarding his power as superior to Christ's, whereas all 
his power is allowed him for the good of the church. The 
supreme sin in the temptation is the worshipping of Satan. 
Question whether (a) civil homage due a sovereign or (b) 



55 

religious worship is demanded here. The two are insep- 
arable. To acknowledge Satan would be to receive from 
him. Tempt, was to seeularity, and idolatry. Jews es- 
pecially exposed to this, adapting themselves to surround- 
ing nations by adopting their idols. Satan proposed to 
give the kingdoms of the world immediately. This was 
just the object of Christ's coming, i.e., to establish Mes- 
sianic sway over the whole earth. The people expected 
this, but Christ chose the spiritual and suffering instead 
of the temporal. The humiliation andsufferingare seen to 
be his choice rather than his accepting the proffer of Satan. 
From Deut. 6 : 13, " Thou shalt &c." Signal honor put 
on Deut. (Especially assailed by late critics.) Thrice 
quoted by Christ under the usual form : yeypaKzac. 

Remarks : The three temptations were a summary of 
his life sufferings. His triumph a token of final triumph. 
Three things. 1. Rebellion vs. God. 2. Denial of 
Christ's supreme. Divinity. 3. Subjection of the same to 
Satan. Not vulgar seductions of sense, but are addressed 
to an enlightened, lofty nature. Hence they are the 
highest conceivable forms of sin. Addressed to the 
whole nature, corresponding to the different periods of 
life, the sensual (childhood), intellectual (youth), and 
imaginative (manhood). The three temptations are 
therefore comprehensive. As to their order, Mth. and 
Lk. differ, hence the Rationalistic cavils. Mth.'s order 
is preferred. 1. Because it exhibits the contrast between 
the first two. 2. Lk.'s *' get thee behind me Satan" more 
fitting for the closing scene. Not easily ascertained what 
determines Lk.'s order. 

When Temptations ended " the devil departed from 
him." ^Ay^pt zatpou, till a fixed season, i. e., to be renewed 
at times. Some refer it to Gethsemane, but properly his 
whole life was a temptation. Following the departure 
of the devil "angels ministered unto him," AcqyMvovv is 
serving food, and hence appropriate. 

Nature of the Temptation. How was Christ approached ? 
Owing to difficulties, sound, sober critics have taken 
refuge in the symbolical rather than the literal, e. g., 
Pressense and Lansre. Doubtless it was something akin 
to humanity because of the " worshipping him." 
Grounds: 1. Bodily appearance of Satan without 



56 

analogy in scripture. Ans : S. can assume the form of 
an " angel of light " if he wishes. 2 Cor. 11: 14. Why 
not that of man ? 2. Unimaginable that S. could trans- 
port Christ through the air, &c. Ans: These cavilers 
admit S. has power over the soul which is far greater, 
then why not over the body ? Dr. Alexander : ~No com- 
pulsion. Verb means " they went together," and thus a 
part of Christ's humiliation in allowing himself to be 
tempted. 3. If Christ did not know S. he was not omnis- 
cient, if he did he would not have conversed with him. 
4. He could not see the world's kingdoms at once with- 
out a miracle and if he did Satan performed a miracle. 
Ans: Who knows Satan's power — how much divine 
power God had given him ? As.cavjglv is ki causes to see." 
Man} 7 believe S. caused all this to pass before the mind's 
eye. If this is so say some critics this surrenders the 
literal inter'n. Not so. It is deciding whether the literal 
or metaphorical should be applied to the passage. 5. 
Strauss : Satan too cunning to make such a proposal. 
Again : If Christ could be tempted he was not sinless, 
if so, no temptation. (Lange and Pressense : Christ had 
but one essence and that divine.) If it be necessary to 
suppose that Christ could sin in order to be tempted, 
then the divine essence could have sinned. Ques. of mid- 
dle ages since Augustine : Can we conceive of Christ 
as peccable? Now, we must hold two things. 1. Christ's 
tempt, not merely an external act. His struggles fierce 
and internal. They shook his very soul. " In all points.'" 
2. " Yet without sin." Wherefore he was sinless. 

Diverse views of the occurrences. 1. Strauss de- 
clares it to be a myth. Meyer says there was a conflict be- 
tween the kingdoms of light and darkness. 2. Schleier- 
macher : A parable given by Christ, and mistaken by his 
disciples. Intended to teach them how to escape temp- 
tation. 3. Nat: External occurrence uttered in symbol- 
ical language. Lange. 4. An ecstatic state of mind 
brought about by fasting. Origen and Cyprian, with 
Olsbausen in modern times. 5. Simply a conflict in 
Christ's mind produced by imagination. Therefore 
Christ was necessarily sinful. Literature on this is 
immense. Vide Trench's Studies on the Gospels. 






57 

PUBLIC MINISTRY. 

Early Judean Ministry. 

Preliminary: Synoptists and John now differ. I. As to 

limits of tlie period, Syns. speak of Christ as leaving 
Judea for Gal. immediately after the Temptation and 
there teaching. They mention no public work in Judea, 
previous to His going to Jerusalem, toward the close of 
His ministry. John (chs. 1-4) supplements their account, 
mentioning a brief visit to Galilee, then a going to Jeru- 
salem to His first Passover, and a subsequent tarrying 
and baptizing in Judea. Hence, John chs, 1-4, may be 
termed History of Early Judean Ministry. 

II. They differ as to Christ's teaching, its nature and 
manner. 

1. According to Syn. substance of Christ's teaching is 
"kingdom of God," its nature, design, conditions of 
membership. (Sermon on Mt., Parables, etc.) In John 
the phrase occurs in but two chs. (3 : 3-5, 18 : 36). 

2. Syn. Christ silent as to Messianic claims, suppresses 
popular Messianic enthusiasm and refuses Messianic 
titles. In John His Divine Person is the main theme. 
(Nicodemus. Woman of Samar.) 

3. Syn. say little of His sacriiicial death. In John it 
is predicted from the first. (Vide. 1 : 29, 2 : li'-22, 3 : 14. 

4. In Syn. Christ teaches universality of gospel only 
toward close of His life. John records it among His 
earliest utterances. (Vide. 4: 21-23). 

Sceptics, exaggerating these difficulties, reject John, 
begin with Gal. Ministry, and adopting Syn. account, 
allege : 

1. At first Christ had no consciousness of Messiahship, 
but was driven to assume Messianic character to accom- 
plish His plans. 

2. Doctrine of a sacrificial mission grew up in His 
mind gradually. Strauss says both these ideas conceiv- 
ed late in life while in Csesarea Philippi, when He saw 
death was inevitable. 

3. Idea of a universal gospel did not originate until 
after His rejection by the Jewish nation. 

To reconcile these differences is the great problem of 
gospel harmony. This may be done by showing 1st. 



58 

That there is no inconsistency in the accounts, or 2. That 
their combination yields historic unity. (1.) These ac- 
counts involve one another and are parts of one whole. 
The idea of king and kingdom are supplemental. (2.) 
Syn's teaching as to Person of Christ is not so meagre as 
sceptics claim. Messianic titles are suppressed, be- 
cause of false Messianic notions. From the outset 
authority is claimed which is irrational unless divine. 

Thecritical view requires the rejection uotof John alone, 
but also of a great portion of the Syn's account. (Bap- 
tism, Temptation, Synag. at Nazareth, Sermon on Mt., 
Parables.) 

(3.) In John, Christ does teach " the kingdom." (To 
Nicoclemus 3: 3-5. Before Pilate 18: 36.) In Syn. 
there are passages teaching divinity (Matt. 11 : 25-30.) 

(4.) A progress is marked in the self-revelation of Christ 
in Jno. as well as in Syn. In public it is enigmatical; 
direct declarations are private. (Cleansing temple. Dis- 
course with Nicoclemus and Samaritan woman.) 

Historical reason for this difference : Christ owed a 
duty to the Jews as a nation, tirst. They could not be 
rejected until they had rejected Him. Jno's plan is to 
record instances of Christ's declaration of Messiahship 
in Jerusalem. When rejected there, He goes to Galilee, 
prepares for the founding of a church, with its officers 
and government, as is related by the Syn. 

Jno. 1-4 : 45 in the harmony are inserted between 
Matt. 4: 11 and 12 (Vide Scheme.) To justify such 
insertion, it must be shown : 

1. No real contradiction exists between the two ac- 
counts. 2. The portion omitted was not in the plan of 
the individual writer. 3. Combination furnishes a con- 
sistent view. 4. Many undesigned coincidences evince 
that the accounts presuppose one another. 

Reasons for insertion here : 

1. Mt. and Mk. indicate space between Temptation and 
Galilean Ministry, by saying that Christ went to Galilee 
because of the inprisonment of Jno. Bap. 

2. These four chaps. Jno. record interviews between 
Jesus and Jno. Bap. They must have occurred before 
Jno. was imprisoned. They must have occurred after 
the Baptism — as it is referred to as past (Jno. 1 : 32), 



59 

and if later than the Baptism they must be subsequent 
to the Temptation, as nothing intervened between these 
events (Mk. 1 : 12). Four chs. of'Jno. at least should be 
inserted here as the narrative is unbroken. Some har- 
monists insert live — thus changing the time of the begin- 
ning of the Galilean ministry. 

Length of this period is inferred from §25. Jno. 4 : 
35. Four months till harvest. Harvest time was the 
middle of Nisan, i.e. beginning of April. 

Four months previous brings us to December, eight 
months subsequent to the first Passover (ch. 8), and one 
year after the Baptism. Hence duration of Judean 
ministry is estimated as one year. (So Meyer, Wieseier). 
The exegesis of some assigns to this verse merely the 
weight of a proverb — (1) Gratuitous. No evidence of 
si.ch proverb. (2) Force of ire forbids (so Meyer vs. 
Alford and Gieseler). These minor differences do not 
essentially affect the events of the period. 

Designs of the events of this period : 

1. Primary. Offering Himself to nation as the true Mes- 
siah — by, a. Testimony of Jno. Bap. b. Cleansing Tem- 
ple — showing supreme authority in House of God. c. 
Miracles, d. Teaching spiritual nature of His kingdom. 

2. Secondary. Preparation for Galilean ministry, in 
consequence of foreseen rejection by Jewish hierarchy — 
by, a. Brief visit to Galilee, b. Choice of disciples irre- 
spective of existing theocracy, c. Stay in Judea, teach- 
ing and baptizing with Jno. Bap., until his imprisonment. 

Series of first things is given in Jno.; viz. first gather- 
ing of disciples, first miracle, first Passover, first teach- 
ing, &c. Jno. records a week's history — day by day. 

1st day 1 : 19-28, 2d. 1: 29-34, 3d. 1: 35-42, 4th. 1: 
43-51, .and 2: 1, r§ 'fjpspa vfj Tpizv h \. e. the third day 
after starting on His journey, making seven days in all. 
Compare Jno's record of last week of Christ's life. 

§18. Testimony of John Bapt. to Jesus. Such testimony, 
naturally to be expected at this period, historically oc- 
curs. Sanhedrim send from Jerus. a deputation of Priests 
and Levites to inquire into the meaning of John's work. 
Their arrival at the Jordan coincides with Christ's return 
from the desert of the temptation (v. 27.) (Others how- 
ever place Christ's return at v. 29 on the day following). 



60 



This deputation evinces the extensive impression pro- 
duced by John's work. The mission was authoritative, 
sent out by the highest ecclesiastical court of the nation, 
whose duty it was to investigate all religious movements. 
It was not necessarily hostile at first. Had they found 
John easily influenced and a courtier (Lk. 7: 25), they would 
have favored his views and used him as an instrument in 
furthering their own designs. (John 5: 35); but having 
heard his testimony to Chiist, they charge him with 
u having a devil." (Lk. 7 : 33). Their questions show 
acquaintance with the prevailing belief that the Mes- 
siah was at hand, and exhibit the state of popular Mes- 
sianic expectations. Art thou the Christ, or Elias (Mai. 
4 : 5), or that prophet. (Dent. 18 : 15.) 

Does not John's denial that he is Elias, contradict 
Christ's express statement, Matt. 11 : 14? Ans : John 
denies he is Elias in person; admits he is in spirit by 
quoting prophecies referring to Elias, as referring to 
himself officially. 

Jews of that day, seem to have made a false distinc- 
tion based on Dent. 18 : 15, between Christ and " that 
prophet." (John 4 : 19, 25, 6 : 14, 7 : 40, 41). 

To these questions, John returns an abrupt " No," 
wishing to keep himself in the background, while he 
brings Jesus forward. He defines his own mission and 
character, by simply quoting Is. 40: 3. 

Points of interest are 1. Extent of John's influence. 

2. Excited Messianic expectations and their character. 

3. Providential care that rulers should be brought into 
contact with Christ, and receive ample proof of His 
claims, from the very first. 4. Humility of John Bap. 
Lange notes analogy between temp, of Christ and John, 
a temptation to external power. 

Place. Text. Recpt. sv Brj&a^apa, (John 1 : 28), criti- 
cal reading, Brj&avca. Location, now unknown. Prob- 
ably e. of Jordan ; a ford near Jericho. Renewed testi- 
mony, (v. 29). "Lamb of God." One of the most 
striking passages of scripture. It embodies the great 
truths of botl/Testaments and declares the fulfillment of 
prophecy. The theme of the O. T. is one to come. John 
says ' Behold Him,' " He is here." 



61 

Hengstenberg confines his reference to the Paschal 
Lamb, as being the true sin -offering. Bnt John uses 
"Lamb" as representative of all O. T. sacrificial types. 

Reasons for selecting " Lamb" as a title of Christ are, 
1. Fulfills Is. 53: 7. " Lamb to the slaughter," which 
Jews recognized as Messianic. 2. Expresses the spirit 
of Christ's ministry. (Comp. Rev. 5: 6.) 

Some critics deny a sacrificial reference, others object, 
1. That John in here teaching vicarious death of Christ 
as Son of God, for the world, displays a knowledge of 
doctrines not then current, but which were the after 
development of advanced theology. 

Ans. a. Objection based on subversion of history. 
These conceptions of Messiah's work were fundamental : 
the}' had died out of the popular creed and John's mission 
was to revive them. 

b. John speaks as a prophet and was himself surprised 
at the manner in which his prophecies were fulfilled. 
(Lk. 7 : 20). 

2d Objection, John 1 : 33 "I knew him not" contra- 
dicts Mt. 3: 14, which presupposes knowledge of Jesus, 
both as man and Messiah. 

Ans. a. Distinction between knowing officially and 
personally. (Rob. Gk. Harm. p. 187, §18. Note.) " John 
Bap. was aware that Jesus of ^N"az. was Messiah of proph- 
ecy. " But he knew not Jesus personally" before His 
baptism, when the spirit descended as sign upon him. 
This is not an explanation. If he did not know him per- 
sonally, why refuse to baptize him (Mt. 3: 14). To ex- 
plain by dignity of Christ's personal appearance (Far- 
rar I. p. 114 seq.) is unsatisfactory. 

b. Better explanation, oux rjoscv has only relative force. 
John .Bap.'s previous knowledge was subjective, now 
possessing a new knowledge based on testimony from 
heaven, he makes an official declaration. (Comp. relative 
use of terms by John in chs. 2: 11, and a further and in- 
creased belief based on testimony of miracles, also 7 : 5). 

§19. Jesus gains disciples. Had the writer of the fourth 
gospel been an impostor, John Bap.'s testimony would 
have been succeeded by the abandonment of his separate 
work, his following Christ as a disciple, going with him 
to Jerus. and testifying to His Messiahship before the 



62 

Sanhedrim. Multitudes would have accepted and follow- 
ed Him. On the contrary, the gospel narrative informs 
us that but few believe, that John Bap. recognizing the 
independency of his own ministry keeps aloof from 
Christ and continues bearing testimony to Him as the 
Messiah. 

Design of Christ in gathering disciples. 1. To lead people 
to Him gradually. 2. He thus begins to lay the founda- 
tion of that church which was to continue after He had 
been taken away, an action based on foreknowledge of 
His death. Although submitting Himself to the people 
for their rejection, He acts as knowing the result. 

v. 35-37. Next day at tenth hour i.e. 4 P. M., two dis- 
ciplesof John follow Jesus: first converts : their address 
" Rabbi" the first recognition of Christ as a teacher. 

Of these two, one was Andrew, the other is argued to 
have been Evangelist John, from, 1. His habitual silence 
as to himself. 2. The minuteness of the details proves 
the narrator to have been an eye witness. 3. Syn. men- 
tion John among the first disciples. 

41 v. Twofold exegesis, — Tzgcuzoz : 

1. Andrew and John seek each his own brother: An- 
drew finds his first. (So Meyer and Alexander). 

2. Both seek Peter : Andrew is first to find him. 

43 v. The next day Philip, being called, brings Nath. 
commonly understood to be Bartholomew — because 1. 
John never mentions a Bartholomew nor the Synops. a 
Nathaniel. 2. Time of his call, while journeying through 
Gal.: (Barthol. resided at Cana of Galilee). "3. When 
Christ showed Himself to His disciples after resurrection 
at sea of Tiberias, Nath. was of their number. (John 
21 : 1, 2.) 4. Philip brought Nath. : and the names Philip 
and Bartholomew always together in the catalogues of 
the Twelve. 5. Bartholomew is a patronjmiic, son of 
Tolmai, by which name he was probably better known 
than by that of Nathaniel. (Vide. Farrar I. p. 152 and 
Note). Thus 6 disciples are called in the first week. 

Objection : In Mt. 16 : 18, Peter's change of name is con- 
nected with his confession, thus contradicting John 1 : 42. 
Aus. Name Cephas is here given ; in Mt. Christ confirms 
and apjolies it. 



63 

Note the character of those called; religious-minded 
men : come to Jordan to hear John ; meet Christ ; listen 
to Bap.'s testimony concerning Ilim, and are convinced 
of the validity of His claims. 

Rationalists allege that Syn. (Lk. 5 : 1-11) represent 
disciples as following Christ because of miracles He per- 
formed. John says (1. 35-51) they were impressed by His 
personal influence. These accounts are not inconsistent. 
According to both, Christ furnishes evidence of His 
Messiahship. Here He calls Philip with authority, shows 
divine knowledge in reading mind of Nath., claims to be 
the connecting link between heaven and earth. (Comp. 
Gen. 28: 12.)" 

Note the only recorded words of Jesus up to this point. 
At 12 years of a^e to His mother, Lk. 2 : 49. To John 
Bap. Mr. 3: 15. "To Satan, Mr. 4: 1-11. To His disci- 
ples, John 1 : 39. 

§20. John 2 : 1-12. Marriage, at Cana. John here 
emphasizes the fact of the "beginning of miracles." Ch. 
2 : 11. Cana of Gal. mentioned, not to distinguish the 
town from another of the same name, but to show that 
the beginnings of Christ's work were in Gal. 

Why in Galilee, and before in Jerusalem ? 1. Prediction 
(Is. 9 : 1, 2, quoted Matt. 4 : 14) that Gal. should be first 
to receive spiritual light, is thus fulfilled. 2. John, who 
confines his account to Christ's Judean work, thus shows 
his knowledge of the work in Galilee. 

Christ went to Galilee at this time, both as a prepara- 
tion for the coming Gal. ministry, and to produce a 
simultaneous impression in different parts of the country 
by his appearance in various places within a short time, 
giving opportunity for judgment upon himself and work. 
This visit is an episode in Judean Period, pointing for- 
ward to the next. 

Farrar identifies Cana with Kefr-Kenna. (Vide Vol. 
I. Note, p. 161. Andrews, p. 149.) Robinson prefers 
Kana el Jelil. 

That the marriage was among Christ's relatives has 
been inferred from Mary's prominence at the feast; as 
to the parties themselves conjecture is fruitless. Joseph 
being unmentioned, it may be assumed he was now dead. 
Jewish marriage feasts usually lasted 7 da}^s (Judg. 14 : 
12). Festivities had begun when Jesus arrived. 



64 

Objections: 1. How did Mary know he could perform 
miracles, if this was first? especially as the occasion did 
not demand it. Wine might readily be purchased. , Arts i 
Some, he wrought miracles in private; some, she looked 
to him naturally for aid; others, from circumstances of 
his birth, she had come to believe in his divinity ; others, 
knowing his work had been inaugurated by his baptism, 
she looked for a speedy fulfilment of her hopes. 

2. How reconcile Christ's working the miracle with 
his statement, " Mj- hour is not yet come," v. 4. Ann : 
Mistaken idea in her mind as to character of Messianic 
kingdom, viz., time of material plenty. Christ shows 
that human motives, even the most urgent, were not to 
be the cause of the manifestation of his glory as Messiah. 
Comp. Lk. 2:49. 

3. Amount of wine produced. Each firkin or bath 
CHeb.) contained from 7 to 9 gals., hence each jar held 
about f of a barrel. (Vide Farrar, Vol. I., p. 166, note 
2.) Ans : Some argue from v. 8, that the water became 
wine, as drawn, or was a handsome wedding gift for a 
poor household. The large quantity is significant of 
Christ's giving without measure. It precludes all possi- 
bility of collusion. 

Designs. 1. To manifest his glory. 2. To relieve 
want and embarrassment of host. 3. Teaches true mo- 
rality ; contrasts John the ascetic with Christ, who did 
not withdraw from the world, but lived above it. 4. 
Enforces the sanctity of the marriage tie. It is analogous 
to feeding the multitudes ; but here, substance is changed, 
there multiplied. (On this miracle, vide Princeton Re- 
view, July and October, 1865.) 

From Cana, Christ goes to Capernaum (emended text, 
ere Kacpappaob/x), probably to join a caravan there making 
up for the feast. From Lk. 4 : 23 it has been inferred 
that Christ at this time wrought miracles there. It is 
preferable to refer this allusion to healing nobleman's 
son, J no. 4 : 46-54. 

§21. John 2 : 13-25. First Passover. Temple Cleansed. 
Christ finds the Temple polluted by the presence of cat- 
tle and doves for sacrifice, and of monej' changers, ex- 
changing foreign coin. Although Christ used a scourge, 
the force employed was moral and spiritual rather than 



65 

physical. Pdv-az (v. 15) refers to men as well as cattle. 
Some infer from v. 16, said, etc., leniency toward dove- 
sellers. Captions cavil. Command is given, because 
doves could not be scourged. 

V. 16, " make not," etc. Comp. stronger utterance 
Matt. 21 : 13, — quoted from Is. 56: 7, — employed at sec- 
ond cleansing of the Temple. V. 17 quot. from Ps. 69:9. 

Significance of the act: 1. Teaches lesson in repent- 
ance, and need of reformation. 2. Symbolic expression 
of Messianic claims. Declares God his Father (v. 16), 
assumes supreme authority in temple (fulfilling Mai. 3 : 
1-3), refers to Temple as type of his bod}- (v. 19), God's 
permanent indwelling, typically represented in the Tem- 
ple, being literal in his life. Christ in public declares 
Messiahship thus enigmatically, because, 1. People are 
not ready to receive him ; false Messianic notions pre- 
vail ; more explicit statement would lead to popular out- 
break. 2. Bible an oriental book. Jews an Eastern 
nation. To them an enigmatic act needed no interpre- 
tation. That the Jews understood him is evident from 
their demanding a sign, v. 18. This shows they were 
knowingly rejecting Christ, although possessing evidence 
of John Bapt., of prophets, and of Christ's miracles. By 
sign they denoted an outward manifestation coinciding 
with their idea of Messiah. Sign given v. 19, afterwards 
called sign of Jona, contains indisputable reference to 
his resurrection (v. 21). This is only occasion of Christ's 
predicting his-resurrection on third day. That his ene- 
mies understood him is seen from their allusion to it 
after his death. (Matt. 27 : 63.) . 

Critical Objections. 1. Unhistoric expectation and pre- 
diction of his death. He could not \^et foresee this issue ; 
people and disciples could not understand him. [Mean- 
der and Olshausen, denying any reference to resurrection, 
interpret, ' Persist and destroy this national temple, and 
I will found a spiritual church.'] 

Ans : Not necessary for Christ to limit his discourses 
by what others could understand. True exegesis uses 
vaov, v. 19, in typical, not double sense. 

2. Obj. Boldness of act would enrage the Jews and 
excite opposition. 



66 

Arts : The suddenness and justice of the act combined 
with the air of Christ's personal authority (Cp. John 18 : 
6) account for no popular disturbance. 

3. Syn. record a similar scene in Passion Week; could 
not have occurred twice, hence both are mythical. 

Ans : Why not twice ? Appropriate at beginning and 
end of ministry. A first and last opportunity of accept- 
ing him. John, who above records the early Judean 
ministry, mentions the cleansing occurring in that period, 
and to avoid repetition omits the second, contained in 
the Syn. Strauss understands cleansing as a real act, 
but in opposition to Judaism and the entire sacrificial 
system. 

V. 23 alludes to further miracles. None recorded, 
John introducing miracles only forsake of the connected 
discourses. Verses 23, 25. Effect. " Many believed," 
with evanescent faith, founded only upon the miracles. 
(Corn p. sncazEuaav^ v. 23, tTuoreozv, v. 24. " Many trusted 
him. He did not trust himself to them.") 

§22. John 3 : 1-21. Discourse with Nicodemus. Nieo- 
demus, member of Sanhedrim, on evidence of miracles 
believes Christ to be a divinely appointed teacher. He 
is mentioned (Comp. 7 : 50), Tabernacles, also (ch. 19 : 39) 
burial. "Coming oy night" shows odium already at- 
taching to Christ. Being a Pharisee and ruler, his visit 
shows that Christ's influence was not confined to a single 
class. 

Jesus teaches, 1. Nature, necessity, source of the new 
birth. 2. Spiritual nature of kingdom of heaven. 3. 
In order to regeneration there is necessity for faith in 
himself, as only revealer of the Father, and sacrifice for 
sin. Christ declares his pre-existen.ee ; displays fore- 
knowledge of the atonement. 

Perplexity of Nicodemus evinces total loss among his 
class, of spiritual meaning of O. Test. Christ's rebuke 
(v. 10) shows that he is teaching no new doctrine. 

Objections to genuineness of the Discourse. 1. These doc- 
trines not developed until later. 2. Terms and ideas are 
those of heretical school in early church, especially such 
phrases, " Christ the only revealer of the Father," "new 
birth," etc. "Regeneration" not a N. T. word. Verbal 
form occurs 16 times; peculiar to John. Only allied 
form in N. T. is Tiahyyvjzoia, Mt. 19 : 28, Tit. 3 : 5. 






G7 

Strauss regards whole discourse as fiction, bearing 
impress of Pseuclo John's mind. Nicod. an ideal charac- 
ter introduced as offset to the reproach that all first con- 
verts were from the poorer class. 

Bauer. All allegory ; Nicodemus representing unbe- 
lieving Judaism, seeking a sign, a counterpart of the 
woman of Samaria, who represents believing heathenism. 

Sceptical Inferences. These doctrines, peculiar to John's 
gospel, are those of Gnosticism. Hence the fourth gos- 
pel must have been written as late as close' of 2nd Cent, 
by a Gnostic, probably a Valentinian. 

Ans. 1. Terminologj T alone is peculiar to John. Both 
Testaments teach these doctrines. Comp. O. T. expression 
Ps. 51: 10 "clean heart:" also Paul's phrase u *r.'<r/c" 
Gal. 6 : 15. 2. True relation of Gnosticism to N. T. 
doctrine, a. Sceptics exaggerate the resemblance; more 
difference than likeness, b. Gnosticism a heresy arising 
within the church. Its ideas and terms are borrowed 
from John. c. Alexandrian philosophy of which Gnos- 
ticism was an off-shoot was imbued with O. T. ideas. 
N. T. was the development of these ideas. Hence both 
drawing from a common source employed to some degree 
similar modes of thought and expression, d. Christ 
dealt with the philosophical questions of His time. e. 
John, writing when Gnostic speculation had begun to 
disturb the church, like Paul, (Cp. Eph. and Col.) 
writes against it, using its nomenclature. Christ's 
teachings now are clearer than those subsequently given 
in Galilee, because, 1. His great purpose of offering 
Himself to the Jews as their Messiah necessitated lucid 
statement of nature and blessings of His kingdom. In 
Galilee His audiences were popular and His aim was to 
establish the church. 2. This was private interview, 
with a well disposed inquirer. (Cp. Woman of Samaria.) 

§23. John 3 : 22-36. Jesus remains in Judea and bap- 
tizes. Some conjecture, without reason, that Christ re- 
turned from Jerus. into Gal. Christ leaves Jerusalem, 
not on account of open hostility, but because after offer- 
ing Himself to the Jews, he had been rejected. He tar- 
ries in Judea (v. 22). 1. National promises must be 
fulfilled: offer of Himself be made more general, not 
restricted to a single feast. He may have attended 



68 

Pentecost and Tabernacles during this period. 2. John's 
testimony bavins: not yet ended, the Galilean Ministry 
could not properly begin. 

Meagre description of Christ's work at this period, no 
miracles, no long discourses, leads to inference that little 
was done. His work is same as that of Bap. 1. Facts 
show likeness. Christ employed the same rite as John, 
with same import, for as no subsequent mention of bap- 
tism occurs until Pentecost, Christian baptism was not 
instituted until after Christ's death. 2. Christ's early 
teaching in Galilee, evidently similar to that in Judea, 
and John Bap.'s work, are described in the same language. 
3. As Christ's work and John's are parallel in time, both 
would naturally pursue the same line of teaching. There 
would not be two different baptisms in same period of de- 
velopment. Remarks : John Bap.'s hold on the masses 
gradually transferred to Christ: His work thus growing 
out of John's. They do not unite, for that would destroy 
their proper relation. Christ stands aside as Messiah. 
John points to Him. They do not separate widely, either 
in place or teaching, lest they should be mistaken for rival 
prophets, v. 24. "John was not yet cast into prison." 
From fourth gospel alone no exegetical reason can be 
assigned for this statement. John however wrote with 
Syn. before him. They make no mention of Judean 
ministry but date Christ's work in Gal. from the impris- 
onment of John Bap. John shows that his narrative of 
Judean work does not conflict with any Syn. statements 
because Christ had not at this time entered upon Gali- 
lean ministry " for John was not yet cast into prison i. e. 
Bap.'s testimony was not yet ended, it was not yet time 
for Christ to leave Judea. ^Enon near Salim probably 
in Valley of Jordan Western side, near Jericho. (Farrar 
I. p. 202, Note.) 

v. 25. Question started as to purifying, between John's 
disciples and a Jew (Emended Text v. 25. /oodatou.) 
Bap.'s disciples complain to him of Christ's baptizing. 
He bears additional testimony to Jesus ; declaring that 
not to accept Him as Messiah, means condemnation. 
(v. 36.) 

v. 31-36. Some say without good reason that these are 
words of Evangelist, rather than of John Bap. for they 
display an acquaintance with doctrines not then revealed. 



Points of interest. 1. John Bap. still had a body of dis- 
ciples. 2. John still regards his ministry subordinate to 
Christ. 3. Clear views of John concerning: Christ. 

§25. John 4 : 4-42. Woman of Samaria — Sychar. This 
name occurs nowhere else in scripture. Common view, 
that it is nickname for Shechem, meaning " drunkard," 
or " liar " is based on, Is. 28 : 1-7, where bphraimites are 
called, shiccdrim "drunkards;" Hab. 2:18 moreh slieker 
"teacher of lies" which is said to refer to Moreh, the 
original name of district of Shechem; and habitual use 
by John of hyoatvo^ (v. 5) to denote a soubriquet (cp. 11: 
16, 19: 13-17.) 

Some say Sychar was suburb of Shechem. Jacob's 
well, near entrance of valley, mile from present city, 
" one of few spots identified with Christ's presence." 
6th hour i. e. noon. 

Different tone of woman and Nicodemus. Nicodemus, 
sober, grave, and earnest, regards Christ as teacher. 
Woman, sprightly, conversational, looks upon Christ as 
traveller. Christ varies His teaching to suit each case. 
With Nicodemus an instructed Jew, He dwells on 
technical topics of religion e. g. doctrines of new-birth. 
To the woman He speaks of a supply for the soul — thirst 
common to all. 

Two views of Samaritans. 1. Common view. En- 
tirely heathen ; no descent from Jacob, no right to O. T. 
privileges. 2. Mixed race — remnants of 10 tribes and 
heathen settlers — looking for Messiah as a prophet (John 
4 : 25). They stand in N. T. as a link between Jews and 
heathen. Not regarding them as chosen people. Christ 
does not pursue ministry among them Mt. 10 : 5. 
Although non-Judaic, they were not pagan (v. 20). 

A historical import of this incident, prediction of the 
universal spread of the gospel, — the natural sequel of 
discourse with Nicodemus. To him Christ taught the 
spiritual nature of His kingdom. If spiritual it must be 
universal, and all formal barriers be done away. 

Smaritans believd on hearing Christ's words (v. 41,42). 
Jews disbelieved though beholding His miracles. 

Sceptics object : Christ here makes distinct claim to Mes- 
siaship, "I am He," but few days later, in Galilee, for- 
bids any allusion to his divinity, even among disciples. 



70 

Ans : Christ is in foreign country. His statements would 
provoke no hostility from ths rulers. This is no real 
advance on His teaching to Nicodemus or John Bapt's 
testimony concerning Him. But now He assumes title 
of Messiah for first time. 

Distinguish in this period between private and public 
teaching. His utterances in private are unrestrained, in 
public, symbolic. 

GALILEAN MINISTRY. 

Ministry in Eastern Galilee. 

Gal. Ministry extends from the close of Judean until 
the three last feasts. The Feeding of 5,000 divides this 
Ministry into those of Eastern and Northern Gal. Its 
commencement and duration depend upon two questions. 

1. Is Syn. journey (Mt. 4 : 12. Mk. 1 : 14. Lk. 4 : 14.) 
Same as that ot John 4., or subsequent to John 5? 

2. Was feast of John 5. 1. Passover, Pentecost, Taber- 
nacles, Purim ? Wieseler has attempted to settle ques- 
tion first by historically making time of John Bap's im- 
prisonment coincident with feast of John 5. 

Discussion of Que*. First. I. Those identifying, jour- 
neys argue. 1. Motive assigned by Syn. and John for 
Christ's' leaving Judca is similar (§24. Mt. 4 : 12, Mk. 1 : 
14. Lk. 4 : 14. Jno. 4 : 1-3). Syns. say it was im- 
prisonment of John. John says he was aware that Phari- 
sees knew that He " made ami baptized more disciples 
than John" (ch. 6). John had been imprisoned by Herod 
through Pharisaic intrigue. Hence Jesus, as being born 
a greater object of hatred than John, departed into Gal. 
to avoid persecution. Two obj's: a. Syn. do not mention 
Pharisees as concerned in John's imprisonment. Ans : 
True ; but if not. why does Jesus leave Judea ? A pri- 
vate quarrel between Herod and John is no sufficient rea- 
son. Jno. (3:25 certainty implies Pharisaic hostility 
evinced by endeavors to stir up differences between John 
and Jesus. Jesus' saying (4 : 44) that " a prophet hath 
no honor in his own country " (i. e. Judea) declares hos- 
tility to himself and hence to John as they were engaged 
in the same work. Objectors cannot say that Jesus de- 
parted merely to begin His Gal. work, for according to 
their own theory the Gal. Ministry does not begin till 






71 

after next Passover, b. If John was imprisoned by Herod, 
how did Christ escape persecution by going to Gal., 
Herod's kingdom ? Christ's mission being religions, not 
political. Ans : He feared Pharisees, acting upon Her- 
od's example, rather than Herod. His care even in Gal. 
where their influence was slight, to repress Messianic 
enthusiasm and His reserve as to his Messiahship, show 
his apprehension of their hostility. 

2. Journey of John 4: 43 is emphasized as though a 
formal leaving of Judea, while the return to Gal. after 
feast of John 5 is passed over without mention. Gess. 
characterizes John 4 : 43 as coram, on Mt. 4: 14. 

3. The discourse with Sam. woman (John 4) precisely 
accords with this view. Christ, rejected by the Jews, 
and about entering on His Gal. ministry, discloses the 
universality of the gospel. 

4. Reception given Christ in Gal. (John 4 : 45) implies 
a formal beginning of His work there of which John 
gives a specimen 4: 46-54. If His work did not com- 
mence at this time, if the Syn. account be not inserted 
here, four months from this arrival until feast of John 
5 : 1 are unaccounted for, a single miracle alone being 
recorded. 5. At feast of John 5, John Bapt.'s ministry 
is referred to as past (v. 35 "was a light"), hence his 
imprisonment and Christ's consequent entering upon the 
Gal. ministry must be placed before John 5. 

II. Those holding journeys of Syn. and John 4 to be 
different, argue: 1. The exegesis of John 4:1 implies 
that John was still at large (vide And. p. 162 ; Wies. 161 ; 
Gres. II. 212.) Ans : Best comm. explain, "John was not 
as successful as Jesus." 

2. From John 4 : 54, " this is again second miracle," 
etc., which mention seems to indicate that this miracle, 
like the first at Cana, was something out of the ordinary 
course of events, it has been argued that the regular Gal. 
ministry had not yet begun. Ans : The emphasis lies 
upon il&cbv, i. e., second miracle performed by Christ 
coming out of Judea into Galilee. 

3. Hostility of Pharisees undeveloped until charge of 
Sabbath-breaking at feast (John 5). Ans : Hostility in 
its effects is certainly spoken of in ch. 3 : 22 and 4 : 3. 

4. Unless Syn. account be introduced after John 5, we 
are obliged to bring in after this time a Passover not 



72 

mentioned by Syn. Arts: This argument does not hold 
(a) in measure— Syn. omit other feasts, e. g., Tabernacles 
and Dedication — nor {b) in mode—it is not their plan to 
record feasts at Jerusalem. 

Arguments pro and con nearly balance. Compromise 
view is held by Ellicott and Teschendorf, influenced by 
Wieseler's chronology, who say Syn. journey and that of 
John 4 is identical, yet Syn. history does not commence 
till after John 5. Ans : The statement of Lk. 4 : 14, "Je- 
sus returned in power of Spirit into Gal." is irreconcilable 
with this view of four months of inactivity. Also state- 
ments intimately connected must be forcibly separated. 
(Tisch.in later editions makes retractions from Wieseler's 
scheme of chronology.) Result. Weight of authority 
places John Bap.'s imprisonment at John 4, and thus 
identifies journeys (So Lange, Gess, Farrar, Robinson, 
Greswell.) 

Discussion of Ques. Second. What was feast of John 
5:1? (Vide. Chronology on Duration of Public Ministry 
also Farrar, Vol. I. p. 368 and Vol. II. p. 467 Excursus 
VIII.). If the feast be not Passover the Gal. ministry 
will be shortened by one year. The method of combin- 
ing these two central points determines the entire Chro- 
nology of Gospel History, and a knowledge of it is a key 
to the understanding of any harmony. Adjustments of 
different harmonists : 

1. Robinson identifies the journeys; feast of John 5, he 
considers Passover : hence, ministry in Eastern Gal. 16 
months, in Northern Gal. 6 months, total Gal. ministry 
22 months. 

2. Andrew's places Syn. journey after John 5. : consid- 
ers feast Passover; hence E. Gal. 12 months, X. Gal. 6 
months, total Gal. ministry 18 months. Christ inactive 
in Gal. 4 months before John 5 : 1. 

3. Lichtenstein — places Sjm. journey after John 5; 
considers feast Tabernacles (in Oct. 6 months later) : 
hence E. Gal. 6 months, F. Gal. 6 months, total Gal. 
ministry 1 year. Christ inactive 10 months. 

4. Wieseler — places Syn. journey after John 5.: con- 
siders feast Purim (one month before Passover John 6 : 
4 according to his scheme second Passover) : hence E. 
Gal. 1 month, E. Gal. 6 months, total Gal. ministry 7 






73 

months. Result of this plan is demonstration of its fal- 
sity, giving but one month to E. Gal. to which other 
schemes give six or twelve. This was most active period 
of Christ's life : time is needed for development of Phar- 
isaic opposition, for change of popular sentiment, for 
growth of faith, for falling off of the merely curious. 
Mission of Twelve alone would occupy more than one 
month. 

5. Lange, Gess, Farrar — identify journeys ; consider 
feast Purim; avoid Wieseler's brevity in E. Gal. by begin- 
ning Gal. ministry between John 4, and 5, thus length- 
ening E. Gal. to 5 months. They synchronize John 5, 
and Alt. 11, also John 6. (Second Passover according to 
their scheme) and Alt. 14. 

6. Ellicott, Tischendorf, vide supra. " Compromise 
view." 

General Result. Harmony shows no contradiction in- 
validating the Gospel narratives. - Note. 1. Robinson's 
scheme, identifying journeys, making feast John 5: 1, 
Passover, gives needed time in E. Gal. and accounts for 
facts. Individual bias eliminated, we come back to this 
scheme. 

2. In no respect do these different schemes affect apol- 
ogetic importance of Harmony. Same periods, with same 
relations, intentions, and order, occur in all. They differ 
only as to time of beginning Gal. ministry, its length, and 
rapidity of its development. 

Order of events during this period of ministry in E. 
Gal : Narrative gathered from three Syn. who are some- 
times parallel, sometimes supplemental. In obtaining 
chronological order, positive statements, when occurring, 
are to be followed, in other circumstances probabilities 
are to be considered. The order is more irregular be- 
cause of activity and great number of events, but the 
commencement (imprisonment of John) and close (feed- 
ing 5000) are fixed. Nothing following the passover of 
John 6 : 4 is to be included in this period, for no inter- 
change of events between periods occurs in several gos- 
pels. 

Robinson arbitrarily takes Lk. 11-13 : 9 belonging to 
last journeys to Jerusalem and, breaking up, inserts, in 
E. Gal. Mk.'s and Lk.'s order scarcely disturbed; only 



74 

deviations Mk. §§ 24, 58, Lk. §§ 29, 58. Matt, much 
disturbed in adapting to their order. To justify, note 

1. Mt. makes ho statement as to sequence in portions 
changed. Tots often used loosely as connective, when 
no consecution is intended. 

2. Mt.'s gospel is topical, e. g., Teaching, 5-7; Mira- 
cles, 8-9 ; Parables, 13. Chronological order general; 
after Feeding 5000, consecutive. 

Characteristics of this period, are 1. Activity, frequent 
journeys, development of plan, miracles and teaching. 
Christ's greatest success is achieved ; opposition is 
aroused. 2. Preparation for founding the church, re- 
jection of Jews as a nation being not yet final. Christ 
renews the offer of himself at feast of John 5. 

Relation of Gal. to Judean work. Jesus' Messiahship 
and the future church are the subjects of both periods, 
but in different order. In Judea the prominent theme 
is his Messiahship, in Gal. the church, also sacrificial ele- 
ment enters from succeeding period. This blending of 
the period as record of a single life, the best answer to 
sceptical objection of irreconcilable discrepancies. 

Four successive subjects of this period twice repeated 
are, 

1. Organization. Call of apostles, that there may be 
witnesses of Christ's work, who shall found and guide 
the church after his ascension. 2. Miracles. Attesta- 
tions of Christ's divinity. ^N~ot arbitrary works of power, 
but a regularly developed system. 3. Opposition. At 
first secret, it increased until Christ was driven from 
Capernaum, after which it became the main feature of 
his life. 4. Teaching, a. Extended discourses, b. Para- 
bles. (Andr. divides arbitrarily by " circuits.") 

These topics are interwoven ; e. g. call of apostles 
(organization) is connected with miracles ; miracles not 
only attest divinity, but teach spiritual truth ; opposition 
is linked with teaching (John 10,) and parables (Mt. 21 : 
23-46.) Teaching to some extent linked w T ith all. Christ 
is set forth Prophet (teaching), Priest (propitiation), King 
(organization). 2nd Passover divides ministry in E. Gal. 
into two parts of 4 and 12 months. Smaller period, dur- 
ing which Christ's place of work is laid down and de- 
veloped, is basis of Gal. ministry. 



75 

Characteristics of 4 months period. Choice of apostles. 
Miracles, selected as specimens of important classes. 
Miracles predominate over teaching. People are first 
aroused, then taught. 

§26. John 4 : 43-45. Mt. 4 : 17. Mk. 1 : 14, 15. Lk. 
4 : 14,15. Arrival in Galilee. Reception Christ was cor- 
dial, Galileans having witnessed Christ's miracles in 
Jerns., (John 4: 45), John 4: 44 "his own country." 
Meyer, Alford and Andrews (p. 168) say Gal. is meant; 
others Nazareth, (Farrar Vol. I. pp. 219); best opinion is 
Judea, his native country. Supplemental character of 
John's gospel is seen in calling Judea Christ's country, 
though not mentioning his birth there. Subject of 
Christ's teaching : Kingdom of God at hand, (Mk. 1: 15. 

§27. John 4 : 46-54. Nobleman's son at Capernaum, 
healed. Only event recorded by John between Christ's 
leaving: Judea to bejnn work in Gal., and his return to 2d 
Passover. (5 : 1). John inserts to contrast faith of 
Galileans — and unbelief of Jews. 

v. 54. Emphasis on eA&oju, showing: Christ wrought 
this cure " as he was going " to Gal. Hence insert before 
Syn. narratives. 

Strauss. This miracle same as that Mt. 8 : 15 circum- 
stances being the same ; but the differences are contra- 
dictions, hence both are false, mere myths* based on 
Xaaman's being healed at distance by Elijah. Ans: The 
differences of time and place, plainly prove two distinct 
miracles (Trench on Mir. p. 100). 

§28. Lk. 4: 16-31, Mt. 4: 13-16. Announcement, 
Rejection at Nazareth. Do Lk. 4 : 16, Mt. 13 : 54, Mk. 6 : 
1 as Lange, Farrar and Lich. say, refer to the same event? 
Robinson and Andrews hold that these passages record 
distinct occurrences, because 1. Mt. mentions Christ's 
removal from Xaz. to Cap. prior to Mt. 13 : 54 and Mk. 
6 : 1, Lk. 4 : 28-31, assigns his rejection at Xaz. as the' 
reason. 2. Lk. 4 : 29, 30, after discourse in synagogue, 
Christ escaped death miraculously; Mk. 6 : 5, mentions 
Christ healing sick at ^s&z. after discourse thus showing- 
there was no tumult. 

3. Two visits not impossible. Would most probably 
make his own countrymen more than one offer. (Comp. 
Andrews, p. 198.) 



76 

Reason for Visit. Christ first proclaimed his mission 
at Jems., the religious centre of God's chosen people. 
So at the outset of Galilean ministry he affords his own 
kinsmen earliest opportunity of accepting him. Driven 
from Nazareth, he goes to Capernaum (Alt. 4 : 13), reject- 
ed there, he returns to Nazareth a second time. (Matt. 
13 : 54.) 

Synagogue usages. (Farrar I. p. 220.) Only instance 
of Christ's reading, usually addressed the people. (Cp. 
Acts 13 : 15.) Christ's intentions were not revolutionary. 
He conforms to Jewish habits. Sacraments are first 
innovations. First time Christ applies prophecy to him- 
self. Is: 61 : 1, describes work and character of Mes- 
siah. Christ declares the passage refers to himself. 

Contrast. Christ's rejection at Jerusalem following 
an act symbolizing judgment (cleansing temple) ; at Naz- 
areth after proclaiming the gospel. Gospel preaching, 
severe or mild, to natural man displeasing. Hearers 
become suddenly enraged, because Christ taught the 
coming rejection of Jews and calling of Gentiles, illus- 
trating this truth by 0. T. facts (1 Kings 17; 2 Kings 5 : 
14). Blind, impulsive, uncontrollable rage, not to be 
explained by proverbial rudeness ofNazarines, for Christ's 
allusions to national rejection. 

Was escape miraculous ? Not so, some. Impressive- 
ness. (Farrar, I., p. 227.) But as occurred among those 
familiar with him supernatural escape more consistent. 
Similar escapes, comp. John 7 : 30 ; 8 : 59; 10 : 39. 

Lk. 4:23. What miracles? 1. Cross reference to 
John, either 2 : 12 (some suppose miracles wrought while 
on way to 1st Pass.), or, 2. Nobleman's son, John 4:46 
—54. 

Settled at Capernaum for at least one year with Peter 
or his mother. Selected because central, populous ; Ro- 
man garrison ; commerce in fish ; on caravan route ; suf- 
ficiently distant from Tiberias, Herod's capital. Vide. 
Farrar, I., p. 178.) Mt. 4:13,14, records this as fulfilling 
Is. 9:1, 2, " by way of sea," 

Site of Capernaum : It lay in plain of Gennesareth, 
which was 4 miles in length. Exact locality is unknown ; 
either Khan Minyeh (Robinson) or Tell Hum (Farrar, p. 
181; Andrews, pp. 203-220.) Unmentioned in O. Test. 



77 

Joseph us carried there when wounded. He lays stress 
on fountains (Jos. iii. 10, §8) and fish. Same fountains 
at Khan Minveh, some say. Name Capernaum (Kefr, 
Nahum, i. e. Village of Nahum) favors Tell Hum. Tell, 
hill, substituted for Kefr, village; Nahum abbrev. Lake 
called in 0. T., Chinnereth, Josh. 13 : 27. "Harp shape," 
(Farrar, I., p. 175, note.) Sea of Galilee, of Tiberias, 
Lake of Gennesaret, 14 miles long, 6 broad, 600 ft. below 
Medit'n, shut in by hills, abounds with fish. Shores 
thickly settled, 9 populous cities. Tiberias and Magdala 
alone remain. Climate varied, both temperate and trop- 
ical ; vegetation luxuriant, fruit continuous. 

§29. Organization. Lk. 5 : 1-11 ; Mt. 4 : 18-22; Mk. 
1 : 16-20. Call of Peter, And., James, John, first act of 
Gal. ministry, that from beginning Christ may have wit- 
nesses and teachers. 

Two theories of call. 1. Naturalistic. Simply adhered 
to Christ from choice as Bap.'s disciples. Gradually, 
more devoted and enthusiastic attached themselves more 
closely to his person. Ans : Contradicts gospel narrative. 
Call is earliest act of Christ, showing foresight in select- 
ing men best qualified for his work. 2. Miid rationalists 
admit early call, accounting for it by, a, Christ's natural 
sagacity ; b. his natural discernment of character. Ans : 
Inadequate to account for historical phenomena. 

Circumstances, a, Public, Lk. 5:1, so validity of call 
is attested. 6, Selected, not from educated, prejudiced 
class, but simple hearted, best adapted for Christ's work. 
Their knowledge was to come from inspiration. Extreme 
poverty erroneous ; in good business, partners, had "hired 
servants." Mk. 1 : 20 ; "left all" no sacrifice unless some- 
thing left. Subsequent poverty voluntary. Blunt : Zeb- 
edee very old at this time and soon died. Comp. Mt. 8 : 
21 " bury my father," Mt. 20: 20 "mother of Zebedee's 
children." Last, unnatural if Z. alive, c. Miracle proved 
authority of call ; illustrated office and work to be under- 
taken : toil, patience, ultimate success depending upon 
God, then labor and God's power to cooperate. (Trench, 
miracles, p. 106.) Some symbolize minutest details. 
Canon of allegorical interpretation : Those facts alone 
significant, originally intended to be such. Lk. places 
call after miracles at Cap. (Lk. 4 : 33-41.) other Syn. 



before. Lk. wishes to contrast rejection at Naz. on one 
Sabbath, enthusiastic reception at Cap. on the next. 

Differences. 1. Mt, Mk. record no miracle, Lk. omits 
Andrew's name, hence some say calls are different. But 
omissions are not contradictions, and a incidents in each 
are same, b after call both accounts say they left all and 
followed Christ. Lk. records miracle wishing to show 
deep impression on Peter's mind. 

2. Lk. says, called while in boat, one call for all. Alt., 
Mk. on shore, mending nets, each pair of brothers called 
separately. Harmonize by making these acts successive. 
Order. Christ's discourse, miracle, beckoning to other 
boat for aid, call of Simon and Andrew, Christ afterward 
walking on shore finds Jas., John mending the broken 
net and calls them. (Smith's Diet. Peter, p. 2447, An- 
drews, p. 228.) 

3. Syn. apparently contradict John who puts call year 
previous (John 1 : 35) hence, say sceptics, both accounts 
mythical. Ans. Syn. don't say first call ; " at thy word" 
implies previous acquaintance, readiness in leaving busi- 
ness shows minds made up. Gospels give distinct stages 
of organization in calling of the apostles, a. John 1, call 
at Jordan to be learners, not required to leave home or 
relinquish business, b. Lk. 5. To be witnesses, in con- 
stant attendance on Christ, c. Mk. 3: 13, 14. Prior to 
sermon on Mt. Definite organization of Twelve. d. 
Lk. 9 : 1-6. Temporary commission conferring authority 
to preach and work miracles. Full apostolic authority, 
not until Pentecost. Miracle is au event in external world 
due to immediate agencv of God. (Hodge's Theol. Vol. 
I. p. 618.; 

Some argue effect here might be produced without 
divine interference, by union of second causes and divine 
prescience, hence analogous to prophecy. Supernatural 
element just as great but strictly miraculous element, i. e. 
immediate exercise of divine power, does not enter. 
(Comp. stater in fish's mouth Mt. 17 : 27. Comp. Ps. 8 : 
8). Trench insists on this distinction : allow second 
causes where we can. But, 1. These two cases belong to 
class of events where Divine efficiency is intended to be 
set forth. Ordinary reader makes no distinction. 2. 
Impression on mind of eye witnesses opposes this dis- 



tinction. 3. Symbolical import of miracle overlooked 
by this view. It teaches, God not only foreknows, but 
his power cooperates with human. 

Miracles. 1. Classification. Some speak of miracles 
of knowledge, of power, of love. But such classifica- 
tion is objectionable, for, according to definition, all mir- 
acles are acts of power. If they are not acts of Divine 
power immediately exercised they are not miracles. The 
expression " Miracle " should be kept distinct and ap- 
plied to a special class of events. Regeneration etc. 
should not be termed miracle. Power, love, etc. may how- 
ever be used to distinguish the main design of the miracle. 

2. Various names. (Vide Trench p. 75). Gospels 
speak of a. ar^mav, a token of presence and working 
of God. b. rspaz, a wonder, astonishment of beholder 
transferred to the work. c. 6'jua/is^, powers i. e. of God. 
d. epya, works i. e. of Divinity. 

3. Twofold design, and proof of each. a. Attract 
attention and impress ; for always in the presence of 
witnesses; cases of popular sympathy ; impression always 
recorded, b' Relieve suffering ; for same awe mi^ht have 
been produced by miracles of different characters, i. e. 
of judgment. Fig-tree cursed is the only miracle of this 
class. Destruction of swine work of demons, not of 
Christ, c. Teach truth ; they are dramatized parables, 
each teaching some aspect of truth. 

They teach : a. Christ's power and willingness to save 
souls; b. Sinner's condition and way of approach, by 
prayer and faith. Disease and death are parts of the 
penalty of sin inflicted by the curse of the law; hence 
when these are removed a prrt of the punishment of sin 
is removed. Mt. 8 : 16, 17 quoted from Is. 53 : 4. The 
atonement also is thus taught, Christ bearing our sins. 
d. Attest Christ's claims ; for Christ says (Lk. 5: 23, 24) 
" whether is easier " . . . " but that ye miy know " 
etc. Yicle also Mt. 11 : 3-5. Rationalists say, " if these 
miracles were real, why disbelieved? Ans : Abraham's 
answer is sufficient, Lk. 16 : 31. 

Christ's miracles contrasted with tho&e of 0. T. and of 
Apostles. 1. His were performed by Ins own power. 
Others were wrought in his name or that of God. It is 
no fair exception, as Rationalists declare, that Christ is 



80 

said to sometimes work " by power of God," " by spirit 
of God," " by finger of God." There were special rea- 
sons for Christ's procedure on these special occasions. 
Sometimes also Christ's true humanity is expressed by 
his faith. 2. 0. T. miracles were punitive, those of Christ 
were miracles of mercy. 3. 0. T. miracles largely con- 
fined to the sphere of nature; Christ's were performed 
in all spheres, the larger portion on man. 4. O. T. mira- 
cles wrought with delay, wrestling in prayer; Christ's 
were performed with ease, instantaneously. 

The number of Christ's miracles must have been in- 
definitely great; as the cases recorded are mere speci- 
mens. Vide M t. 4 : 24, 8 : 16, 11 : 5, 14 : 2, 15 : 30. We 
may imagine that no cases which could be brought to 
him were not brought. Wherever Christ went disease 
and death disappeared. Thus was signified the fulness 
and sufficiency of Christ's salvation. 

A selection from this vast number is made upon the 
principle that each case shall make prominent some new 
phase of truth. When repeated it is because of a differ- 
ence in method of cure, or the effect upon the subject, or 
on account of some new development in the work of 
Christ. 

Number recorded. Some include those of which Christ 
was the subject, e. g., birth, resurrection, escape from popu- 
lace. Others include also the case of Mary Magdalene, 
although it is not mentioned in detail. Omitting these 
the number may be given as 35. 9 on external nature, 
26 of healing. Mt, records 20, Mk. 18, Lk. 20, John 8. 
Only one is common to all evangelists, viz. feeding of 5,- 
000. Eleven are common to three, viz. 10 to Mt., Mk. 
aud Lk.; 1 to Mt,, Mk., John. Six were common to two, 
viz., 3 to Mt., Mk., 2 to Mt., Lk., 1 to Mk., Lk. Mt. 
records 3 alone, Mk. 2, Lk. 6, John 6. 

Various principles of classification. 1. With reference 
to power displayed and sphere of exercise ; upon man ; 
upon nature; inanimate and animate ; upon spirit world. 

2. By truths embodied, a. Christ a Savior with almighty 
power, b. Character of sinner, blind, polluted, disabled. 

3. By faith of recipient, whether personal or intercessory, 
strong or weak, that of a Jew or Gentile. 4. Mode of 
working, at hand or at a distance, byword or touch. It 
is impossible to make a perfect classification. 






81 

Theories. I. Rationalistic. Miracles are impossible. 
Those seemingly miraculous occurrences alone took place 
which may be explained naturally. A distinction is made 
between miracles of healing and those in which nature 
is the subject of Christ's power. The former are admit- 
ted because they may be naturally explained ; the latter 
are denied because inexplicable. Their presence in the 
narrative is accounted for upon the mythical hypothesis. 
Paulus: Jesus was a physician, having acquired his art 
from the Essenes; he gave prescriptions; a list of medi- 
cines is enumerated from contemporaneous authors. 
Celsus : Christ performed miracles by means of magical 
arts learned in Egypt. Renan : Christ performed mira- 
cles against his will. Popular expectation as to the Mes- 
siah compelled him to become a wonder-worker. Hence 
his miracles were mere deceptions. 

Ans : The Scripture narrative represents Christ as 
working without means, and producing by word alone 
instantaneous effects. 

II. Psychologico-Ethical. Christ's miracles the result 
of animal magnetism ; due simply to the influence of mind 
over the bodily condition. The theory is based upon 
observed facts, proving a, a mysterious influence of mind 
over mind, and, 6, the influence of mind and will over 
body. In support of this view, 1. They argue from 
Scripture, that faith was required in all cases in the recip- 
ient or the cure could not be performed, e. g., no miracles 
in Fazareth " because of unbelief," Mt. 13^: 58. In Gal. 
general!}' the people were in sympathy with him, hence 
he could perform miracles. 2. Stress is laid on Christ's 
human sympathy, his commanding presence, his superior 
spirituality- Thus he projected himself into the con- 
sciousness of others. Some miracles, e. g., raising of 
dead, healing of congenital blindness, cure of leper, can- 
not be thus explained. Hence some are rejected. As to 
others, it is said that Christ merely declared a cure 
already wrought. 

Strauss: Derogatory to make Christ's success depend 
not on teaching but on momentary power. Character of 
Jesus is weighted down with these cures. O. T. records 
cures, therefore Christ performed some, but only when 
he could not avoid so doing." Stress laid on " sign " 



being asked for, hence no miracles performed. " Sign 
of Jona" referred to the preaching of Jonah. Christ 
commanded the discip'es of Baptist to report to him the 
spiritual results of his work — not real miracles — when he 
said " the blind see," etc., Mt. 11 : 4, 5. 

Strauss rejects all miraculous cures; all miracles with 
accompanying conversations ; miracles introduced later 
to explain the conversation ; all mentioned as occurring 
twice; all to which there are analogous parables — the 
allegory transformed by later writers into a miracle. 
Thus the number is reduced, the residuum is explained 
away. 

All such writers are involved in the following dilemma : 
either Christ is a mere enthusiast, not above the people, 
or a conscious deceiver. In either case how could Christ 
be a moral teacher, the author of the Christian religion ? 
Yet this they hold. 

§30. Mk. 1 : 21-38. Lk. 4 : 31-37. Healing Demoniac 
in Synagogue. Lk. says Christ's first Sabbath in Cap'rn ; 
next after rejection at Nazareth. Taught in Synag. with 
authority ; during service healed demoniac. Miracles of 
dispossession peculiar to N. T. Adifiw, dacfiovcov, in 
Homer=#eoc; in later Gk. (Plato) beings intermediate 
between God and man ; Philo and Joseph us, souls of men, 
especially the wicked ; Socrates, good spirit, tutelar di- 
vii.ity ; LXX., heathen idols, hence Paul (1 Cor. 10 : 19), 
heathen sacrifice to dacpovta. E. Y. "devils" incorrect, 
for in X. T. but one dca^oXo^. His servants are demons. 
(Smith's Dic'y, Demons, p. 583.) (Demoniacs, Trench, 
p. 125. Meander's Life Christ, pp. 145-151.) 

Design of this class of miracles is to exhibit man as by 
nature the helpless bond-slave of Satan, and Christ as the 
only one able to effect his deliverence. While Christ 
was upon earth peculiar license seems granted to evil 
spirits. His power over them, besides attesting his di- 
vinity was fulfillment of the Protevangelium. Gen. 3 : 
15. Seven curses (including Mary Magdelene) of demon- 
iacal posession are recorded. 

Objections. 1. Phenomena of possession contradict 
consciousness. Will is free. It cannot be so wholly con- 
trolled by an unseen being much less could several 
demons possess one man. Ans. We must not look to 



83 

consciousness for information respecting facts outside the 
sphere of consciousness. Scripture teaches Satan has 
access to minds of men, to lead them captive at his will. 
Possession must have accorded with their nature and ours. 

2. Possession not recorded elsewhere in Scripture and 
does not now occur : Ans. Latter position cannot be 
proved. Special propriety of such cases at time of Christ : 
culmination of the conflict between the kingdoms of 
good and evil. Saul is an instance found in 0. Test. 3. 
No curse of this kind mentioned in John but all are in 
Gal. Ans. Silence proves nothing. John does introduce 
the obnoxious doctrine. John 8:48. "hast a devil," 
13: 27 " after the sop Satan entered into him." John 
records only miracles introducing long discourses, hence 
these omitted. 4. Demoniacal possession is analogous to 
mania, idocy, epilepsy, etc., hence mere nervous affec- 
tions controllable by will power. Jesus, possessing great 
personal magnetism, wrought these apparently miracu- 
lous cures. Ans. Mythical theory here is inconsistent; 
aiming to prove the gospels myths, it admits that narra- 
tive of these cures relates actual, historical events, hence 
becomes Naturalistic. Dogmatic theory of Baur. Vic- 
tory of Christ over heathenism set forth under this sym- 
bolic form. Accommodation Theory. Spinoza : Christ, 
though not sharing popular superstitions, accommodated 
himself to them, by acting as though the cases of possess- 
ion were real, while he knew they were only apparent. 
Christ's literal words are parabolic. Ans : a, This view 
irreconcilable with Christ's character, as portrayed by 
those who hold it. It charges him with conscious decep- 
tion, b, Christ's language is not hypothetical, but explicit. 
Separate personality of demons is evident, for Christ 
distinguishes demon from person possessed, addresses 
them, they answer, when cast out man becomes as other 
men, they enter herd of swine, &c. (Vide. Ebrard, p. 251, 
Farrar, L, p. 236, note.) 

Christ silenced (cr^«w%rr=be muzzled) demon's testi- 
mony (Lk. 4 : 34, 35) because, a\ He would not accept 
testimony of such a witness. 6, To permit such a title, 
" Holy One of God," at this stage of his work would 
have precipitated Pharisaic hostility. Prominent features 
of dispossession ; loud voice, crying, bodily prostration. 



84 

Effect: Christ's authority established; his fame spread 
abroad; attention attracted to his preaching. (Mark 1 : 
27-28. 

§31. Matt. 8:14-17; Mk. 1 : 29-34; Luke 4 : 38-41. 

Peter's Wife's Mother. This miracle wrought same day 
as preceding. Mt.'s plan being topical, not chronolog'l, 
this is grouped with other miracles in ch. 8. Disease, 
great ''fever," izoptr^ fizydXtu being medical phrase, it has 
been inferred Luke was physician, and had personal 
knowledge of the case. Fever probably signifies general 
disability of sinner joined with burning restlessness of 
sinful desires. Mode of cure : Christ stood over her (Lk.), 
took her hand, lifted her up (Mk.) and rebuked the lever 
(Lk.) Note completeness of cure; no weakness, nor 
gradual convalescence, but " immediately she arose and 
ministered unto them." (Trench on Mir., p. 192.) 

Sceptics argue from " rebuked fever," either possession 
is ordinary disease, or fever is possession. Ans : Use of 
figurative lan^uasre is overlooked. This is an isolated 
case — fever personified ; it does not answer or cry out. 
Comp. Christ's command to winds, " Peace, be still." 

This is first time Peter is distinguished above the other 
apostles; miracle worked in his own family. Compare 
"wife's mother," Mk. 1 : 30 and 1 Cor. 9 : 5. Mk. 1 : 32, 
33, says at sunset, whole city brought sick to Christ. 
Some say, waited until evening, because unlawful to heal 
on Sabbath, but that objection not yet raised. Observe 
that it is first proposed by Pharisaic emissaries from Je- 
rus'm. True explanation, cool of evening proper time 
to move the sick. This Sabbath a specimen day. Crowds 
seek him next morning. Note " all that were diseased," 
contrasted with "them possessed with devils," Mk. 1 : 32. 
Hence possession differs from ordinary disease. 

§32. Mk. 1 : 35-39 ; Lk. 4 : 42-44 ; Mt. 4 : 23-25. First 
Circuit in Galilee. Mk. 1 : 38, 39, contains Christ's first 
intimation of future plan of labor. Taken in connection 
with disciples' statement v. 37, it teaches his work was 
not stationary, Cap. being selected merely as headquar- 
ters. It is conjectured this circuit very brief, but a week, 
a single miracle being recorded. Christ's work itinerant 
and thorough (Mk. 1 : 39, " synagogues in all Galilee"). 
Christ's method, teaching in synagogues; his doctrine, 



85 



" kingdom of God," " gospel of the kingdom." Note 
Christ's habit of private devotion, Mk. 1 : 35. 

§38. Mt. 8:2-4: Mk. 1 : 40-45; Lk. 5: 12-16. Heal- 
ing Leper. Ebrard, Trench, Lange, follow Mt.'s order ; 
Robinson, Lk's, who more carefully observes chronolog. 
sequence. Ten lepers only recorded cure of this disease 
Lk. 17 : 12). These two instances are onlv specimens, 
Comp. Mt. 10 : 8 ; 11:5; Lk. 4 : 27 ; Lk. 7 : 22. Jose- 
phus notes current slander that Jews driven from Egypt 
because of leprosy. Two kinds of leprosy, a. Elephan- 
tiasis. (Job), b. WhiteLeproys, kind mentioned in Leviti- 
cus and gospels. Ceremonial law, Lev. 13. Sufferer 
clothed in mourning, with head bare and garments rent. 
When pronounced clean, ceremonies occupying a week 
were requisite and all classes of sacrifice. Import of 
these requirements. Two views. 1. Michaelis and 
Rationalistic School say were civil acts to prevent spread 
of contagion, and for social protection. Ans : a. Dis- 
ease was hereditary, but probably not contagious, e. g., 
Naaman, general of Syrian army. (2 Kings 5 : 1). Ge- 
hazi conversed with king of Israel (2 Kings 8 : 5). 
(Trench on Mir. p. 174). b. This view does not account 
for the religious rites, or sense of moral impurity attach- 
ing to this disease. 

2. True view. Leprosy selected as most appropriate 
type of nature of sin ; hereditary, spreading from single 
spot over entire body, incurable by human agencies, 
loathsome. Lepers were thought smitten by God. 
Hence Vulg. renders Is. 53: 4 "quasi leprosum" giving 
rise to idea that Christ was to be a leper. (Farrar Vol. 
I. p. 149). So Talmud and early church, hence disease 
an honor. 

Christ healing leprosy typified his ability to save from 
sin. Symbolic nature of this disease is seen in form of 
leper's request, to be cleansed, not healed and in, Christ's 
answer " Be thou clean." Christ touched the leper, 
although contrary to Mosaic law. Lev. 13 : 24-46 ; 
Num. 5 : 2. Shewing that in his saving work he shrinks 
from no man however polluted. (Farrar Vol. I. p. 275). 

Leper commanded to shew himself to priests (Lev. 
14: 4). a. To gain official recognition of cure. b. To 
exhibit his relation to the law. Christ enjoins secresy 



86 j 

(Mk. 1 : 44). Objection— cure wrought in presence of 
multitudes, hence secresy impossible. Lange, Farrar, 
Andrews, cure wrought in presence of but few. Grotius, 
Bengel, Alexander, injunction limited to time between 
cure and shewing himself to priests. (Trench on Mir. p. 
180). Better opinion: Christ intended to repress fanati- 
cal enthusiasm, which would hinder his work. He would 
subordinate works to word. He would not attract peo- 
ple as mere miracle-worker, but as Saviour. (Andrews 
p. 235. Farrar Vol. I. 277). Man disobeying and spread- 
ing report, (Mk. 1 : 45). Christ was forced to avoid all 
centres of population because of undue popular zeal. 
Supposition that Christ's retirement was caused by cere- 
monial uncleanness, is fanciful. Naturalistic view. 
Schenkel. Leprosy could not be healed by will power; 
hence man was nearly well, Christ observing this, simply 
announced it. 

§34. Opposition. Mk. 2 : 1-12 ; Lk. 5 : 17-26 ; Mt. 19 : 
2-8. Healing Paralytic on Christ's return to Cap'm after 
Gal. circuit. Head Mt. 9 : 1 as conclusion of eh. 8 and 
follow Mk.'s order. Mt. grouping miracles places this 
as though wrought upon Christ's return from country of 
Gergesenes. 

This class of diseases exhibits the helplessness of sin- 
ner. In healing them Christ always commands patient 
to move the part paralyzed, thus setting forth nature and 
power of true faith. Christ's command " Be clean," in 
last miracle, emphasizes pollution of sin, "arise and walk," 
its power. Mk. 2 : 1, iv oizat, "at home," not "in the 
house." Observe new step in teaching, by miracles. 
Christ addresses man, " Thy sins be (correctly, have been, 
dificovzac, Doric; perf. pass., not subj.) forgiven thee," thus 
directing attention awav from mere external result to its 
spiritual signification. 

Some falsely infer from Christ's address that the palsy 
was due to sinful indulgence, or that Christ accommo- 
dates himself to idea that all suffering was direct punish- 
ment of specific sin. Scribes and Pharisees secretly 
charge Christ with blasphemy. They were right in 
supposing God alone could forgive sins, wrong in not 
accepting proofs of Christ's divinity. 

Emphasis of Christ's reply (Lk. 5 : 23) rests on " say" 
i. e. claim to be able. The former claim any one might 



87 

make, the latter is more difficult of proof. At Christ's 
word the man is healed. People are astonished and 
glorify God. v. 24. Revelation of conscious divinity. 
New element: Pharisaic opposition. While people wel- 
come Christ with enthusiasm Pharisees, for first time, 
raise opposition in Gal. This opposition was due to 
influence of Pharisees at Jerus. and though not officially 
sanctioned by them, shows they were carefully watching 
Christ's movements. 

§35. Mt. 9:9; Mk. 2 : 13, 14 ; Lk. 5 : 27, 28. Call of 
Matthew. Call of Mt. to be Christ's apostle is related to 
development of Pharisaical opposition, in the fact, Mt. 
was publican and specially obnoxious to this sect (An- 
drews p. 238.) The feast of Levi (Mt.) did not occur at 
this time because 1. Twelve were with Christ at feast, at 
call Mt. All not yet chosen. 2. Feast interrupted by 
message of Jairus. Raising of Jairus' daughter occurred 
subsequent to Christ's return from Gadara. Mt.'s call 
previous to this. 3. Breach with Pharisees too marked 
for this early period. 

Mk. and Lk. relate under exactl}- similar circumstances, 
call of Levi, yet in their lists of apostles mention no 
Levi, but Matthew. Levi was probably original name, 
changed upon becoming apostle. Comp. Simon changed 
to Cephas. (John 1 : 42.) Matthew—' gift of God.' 

Publican hateful to Jews, being constant reminder of 
Roman domination, and taking advantage of his position 
to practice great extortion. Humility of Mt. seen ' p in 
fact, he alone records his name as " the publican." Mt. 
10 : 3. (Farrar, Vol. I, p. 245.) For sceptical inferences, 
vide. Ebrard, p. 265. 

§36. John 5 : 1-47. Second Passover. Galilean work 
is here interrupted by a brief visit to Jerus. to attend 
feast. " Hostility of Pharisees compels Christ's speedy 
return to Gal. not ^oiiis: a«;ain to Jerus. for eighteen 
months. 

Reasons for inserting John 5, here. 1. Lk. §37 gives 
note of time viz. aa^drco [dsozepoiTpcoTco]. Text here is 
doubtful, interpretation uncertain, the adjective never 
occuring elsewhere. Wieseler suggests the reference is 
to "first Sabbath in the second of the cycle of seven years, 
which completed the sabbatical period." Wetstein, " the 
first sabbath of the second month." 



88 

Andrews explains with reference to animal feasts. 
First Sabbath after Passover was first first Sabbath ; first 
after Pentecost was second — first Sabbath ; first after 
Tabernacles was third — first Sabbath: Com p. modern 
usage — first Sunday after Epiphany, first after Easter, 
first after Trinity, &c. (Andrews, p. 241.) 

Sealiger. Ewald, Keim, Robinson, etc. suppose this 
sabbath to be the first after the second day of Passover, 
from which the fifty days to Pentecost were counted : 
the Sabbaths of this interval being numbered, the first 
Sabbath after second day, third Sabbath after second day, 
etc. (Andrews p. 240. " Lightfoot on Mt. 12 : 1.) 

Last view is to be preferred, it being the only explana- 
tion appealing to popular usage; likely that such a term 
would be current with the masses. 2. Agrees best with 
season of year. Standing corn ripe enough to be pluck- 
ed and eaten. This could not be before Passover, being 
the time for offering first fruits. 3. Results obtained. 
The occurrences of this feast, if introduced here^harmo- 
nize precisely with Syn. narrative. The agreement 
amounts almost to demonstration. A connected account 
of the development of Pharisaic opposition, is furnished, 
three successive instances being noted, viz. its outbreak, 
at the healing of paralytic, §34, its growth at Christ's 
call of the publican, §35, its increasing definiteness at 
Passover, §36. At the feast of John 5:1, for the first 
time, Christ is charged with Sabbath breaking. In the 
Syn. narrative the same charge is taken up and pressed by 
his enemies in Gal. The inference is unavoidable, that 
John 5 should be inserted here. The supposition that 
at this time Christ went up to the Passover and was 
there openly charged with being a Sabbath-breaker, by 
the Jews, Pharisees, the highest religious authorities, 
gives the best and only adequate explanation of the in- 
troduction at this point by the Syn. of the same charge, 
as preferred against him by the Pharisees of Gal. Christ 
had previously wrought many cures in Gal. on Sabbath, 
and even in the Synagogues, without Pharisees making 
slightest opposition, but their bitter persecution of him 
on this ground, henceforward, admits of easy explanation, 
when we find from John 5, that Jerus. Pharisees attempt 
to kill him because of a Sabbath cure. 4. Gal. ministry 



89 

began after John 4. Where can John 5, be inserted? 
This the only place. 

Site of Bethesaida cannot be accurately determined. It 
was near Sheep Gate (i. e. market), which was toward 
the N. E. of the city. Robinson identifies with small 
intermittent spring called fount of the Virgin. Objected to, 
as not lartre enough for the five porches, and multitude 
of " sick folk." 

Weight of authority rejects v. 3 (latter clause) and 
whole of v. 4. Wanting in, B, D, and Sinaitic. Inter- 
nal arguments against its genuineness are, 1. Never 
alluded to elsewhere. If such spring existed, its fame 
would be world wide. 2. Wholly out of analogy with 
miracles of 0. and N. T. No spiritual truth is connected 
with it, to be believed or attested. Angelic agency never 
recorded as working miracles elsewhere. (Farrar Vol. 
I. p. 372. Note.) In favor Text Recpt, Owen on John, 
in loco. Reference to angel is variously interpreted. 

1. Literal. The text accepted with all its difficulties, 
on ground, that narrative is not impossible. 2. Natural- 
istic. Hengstenberg, Robinson. Spring simply medici- 
nal, its properties due to angelic agency, but the cure not 
always immediate, nor all cured. 

3. Allegorical. Take ayyeAoz in etymological sense, 
" messenger," then spring is spoken of figuratively as 
God's messenger. 4. Best. Reject the doubtful verses, 
and the difficulty vanishes with them. 

Sabbath observance was test question. By it the Jews 
were distinguished from Gentile nations. It was the 
chief mark of their national and theocratic fidelit} 7 . At 
time of Christ the ascendancy of mere ritual was such, 
that its spiritual observance was scarcely known. Innu- 
merable, minute and absurd regulations, had taken the 
place-of the Mosaic law. • It was with this dead formality, 
that Christ came constantly into conflict, and on account 
of it was so repeatedly charged with Sabbath breaking. 
(Farrar Vol. I. p. 430,"§5). vv. 16-18. Jews " sought to 
slay him." Many regard this as official sentence of San- 
hedrim, and Christ's discourse (v. 19-47) a defence de- 
livered before them. No evidence that this was the case; 
the murderous purpose to kill Christ is now found, a 
pretext on which to base it is obtained, but the formal 
decree to slay him is made some months later. 



90 

Christ's discourse contains clear and profound state- 
ment of his relations to the Father. In Syn. he presents 
only popular arguments. Lessons of the discourse: 1. 
God works ceaselessly. Sabbath commemorates rest 
from creation not cessation from all work. 2. Christ's 
work identical with God's, not mere imitation, and is 
based upon his immediate perfect knowledge of the 
Father. 3. Christ the source of life, and the judge of 
all. Resurrection and judgment referred to. Eternal 
generation taught. 4. Necessity and responsibility of 
exercising faith in himself; rejecting him is to reject 
God. Rage of Jews aroused because he claimed God as 
his Father, " making himself equal with God." The 
Pharisees, therefore, understood Christ as claiming 
divinity. 

Strauss alleges discrepancy in the gospel narrative of 
the development of opposition to Christ on the ground, 
that Syn. make its growth gradual, occasioned by Sab- 
bath-breaking, while John traces it to Christ's teaching 
concerning his person, causing sudden outbreak. 

Ans: This discrepancy much exaggerated. All four 
evangelists make the origin of organized opposition, Sab- 
bath-breaking. All difference in their accounts of its 
development is due to the characteristic difference of 
Christ's ministry in Judea and Gal. In Judea his great 
design was to manifest himself plainly to Jews as Mes- 
siah : in Gal. to instruct believers who should organize 
the church; in Judea he had to deal with the rulers, his 
enemies : in Gal. with the people who heard him gladly. 

Christ's allusion to John Bap.'s testimony as already 
past (v. 35) strengthens the view that Gal. ministry began 
previous to John 5. 

§37. Mt, 12 : 1-8 ; Mk. 2 : 23-28 ; Lk. 6 : 1-5. Pluck- 
ing Corn on the Sabbath. This incident occurred first Sab- 
bath after Passover, while Christ was travelling, either 
to visit different synagogues, or more likely, hastening 
from Jerus. back to Gal. to escape impending persecution. 

Conduct of Pharisees now changes. Hitherto their 
hostility had been secret, henceforward their emissaries 
follow Christ, striving to harass him, and destroy his in- 
fluence. Plucking the corn was sanctioned by Mosaic 
law (Deut. 23 : 25.) Christ replies to the charges of the 



91 

Pharisees with five arguments. 1. David's eating shew 
bread. (I. Sain. 21 : 1-7.) Point of comparison between 
this case and Christ's is the breaking of law. Law of 
Sabbath and law of sanctuary derived their authority 
not from their essential holiness but from God alone, and 
if in certain circumstances it was just for a man to break 
the one, why might it not be lawful to break the other. 
2. Law itself required of the priests more arduous toil 
on Sabbath than on other days, in performing temple 
services. 

3. Hos. 6:6. "I desire mercy, not sacrifice." The 
design of the law was blessing; by their formality 
Pharisees had made it a curse. 4. Sabbath designed for 
man. Analogous to 3d. Sabbath instituted for man's 
good, and not to be so burdened with observances that 
his higher interests become subordinate to them. 5. 
Christ's supreme authority; " Son of man, Lord of Sab- 
bath" ; Sabbath law could be altered by him with same 
authority as by God. Observe supplemental character 
of gospels : of these five arguments, but two are common 
to all the evangelists. Note increasing self-revelation of 
Christ recorded by Syn. ; he is greater than temple; has 
authority over law equal to God. Thus Syn. and John 
differ, not as to Christ's personal consciousness of Mes- 
siahship, but merely as to his mode of manifesting it, 

§38. Mt. 12 : 9-14 ; Mk. 3:1-6; Lk. 6 : 6-11. Healing 
withered hand on Sabbath. Occurred after Christ's return 
to Galilee. Mk. uses definite article, "the synagogue," 
probably the one in Cap. Wieseler's chronological 
scheme giving him too many Sabbaths, for this month, 
he makes this Sabbath and the preceding, consecutive 
days, one the weekly Sab. the other a feast Sab. Phari- 
sees watch Christ to find pretext for persecuting him. 
Christs asks them "Is it lawful to do good on the Sab- 
bath-days or to do evil ? to save life or to kill ?" Some 
say this question is unfair; the Pharisees never held it 
was right to do wrong. Ans. Christ takes extreme case. 
Their forbidding attendance on sick on Sabbath day, in- 
volved serious responsibility, possibly loss of life. Not 
to do good was to do evil. Christ had also in view their 
purpose to kill him, hence uses this ad hominem argu- 
ment: He intended to relieve suffering, they were con- 



92 

spiring to murder him ; which kept Sabbath better ? He 
also argues from their practice. They would never hesi- 
tate to pull a sheep out of a pit on Sabbath, yet forbade 
healing a crippled man. Talmud now forbids such help 
to animals, but the injunction was perhaps occasioned 
by Christ's argument, as there was nothing of the kind 
in force then. Effect of this miracle was not as formerly, 
to excite admiration of all, but filled Pharisees with rage 
and led them to counsel with Herodians against Christ. 

Herodians. 1. Westcolt's view. (Smith'sDict. p. 1054.) 
Those who saw in the Herods a protection against direct 
heathen rule, and those who looked with satisfaction 
upon such a compromise between the ancient faith and 
heathen civilization as Herod the Great and his succes- 
sors aimed at, as the true and highest consummation of 
Jewish hopes. 2. Common view. Herods mere tools 
of Roman gov't, and the Herodians mere sycophants, 
favoring Roman rule. Their union with Pharisees, 
politically their opponents, is a great step in the opposi- 
tion organizing against Christ. 

§39. Mt. 12 : 15-21 ; Mk. 3 : 7-12. Success. Christ's 
popularity, despite increasing opposition grew so greatly, 
that multitudes follow him from all parts of the country, 
Gal., Judea, Idurnea, beyond Jordan, Tyre and Sidon. 
So great are the crowds, he is forced to enter a boat 
" lest they should throng him." Multitudes typify final 
success of the gospel and were fulfillment of Is. 11 : 10; 
42: 1, which predict the Gentiles as sharers in Messianic 
blessings. 

The first stage of development of opposition is now 
ended, and the subject of teaching becomes prominent. 
The people having been aroused and drawn to him, they 
are prepared to hear his words. 

§40. Organization. Mt. 10:2-4; Mk. 3:13-19; 
Lk. 6: 12-19. Appointment of the Twelve. This is third 
step in organization, first at Jordan, second at Sea of 
Galilee. Mk. and Lk. clearly connect this, with Sermon 
on Mount; Mt., however joins it with their temporary 
mission. Lk. 6 : 13. Note, different classes of follow- 
ers distinguished, disciples in general and apostles chosen 
from these. Nature of office. 1. To be with him as 
witnesses. 2. To preach. 3. To work miracles. Mk. 



93 

3 : 14, 15. These qualifications preclude the permanency 
of this office. In gospels name apostle occurs but nine 
times, Mt,, Mk. and John once each, Lie. six times, in 
Acts more than thirty times. They were u learners " 
until Pentecost, after that fully apostles. Their miracu- 
lous power was not coequal with that of Christ but was 
limited to healing sick, raising dead, demoniacal posses- 
sion. They had no power over nature, only over man, 
their cures being illustrations of their saving work. 
Number twelve, significant of "perfection (Lange on Mt. 
in loco.) Comp. 12 sons Jacob, stones of Jordan, High 
Priest's breast-plate, 12 spies, 12 foundations of New 
Jerus., 144,000, perfection perfected, the church in heaven 
(Rev.) There are four lists of apostles ; three in gospels, 
one in Acts 1 : 13. Each contains three classes of four 
each. Peter heads the list. Each class invariably begins 
with the same name. Iscariot is always last. Lebbeus 
(Mt.,) Thaddeus (Mk.,) and Judas the brother of Jas. 
(Lk.) are commonly considered as referring to same per- 
son. (Farrar Vol. L, p. 251.) 

§41. Teaching. Mt. 5 : 1 to 8 : 1 ; Lk. 6: 20-49. 
Sermon on Mount. Contrast in point of simplicity, pro- 
fundity, grasp of principles, and authority, between 
Christ's teaching and that of heathen philosophers or 
Jewish schools, affords clear proof of his divinity. Four 
forms of Christ's teaching. 1. Lon^ discourses in John 
relating to his person. 2. Long discourses in Syn. 
concerning kingdom of Heaven, involving his person and 
sacrifice. Longest are, Sermon on Mt., and denuncia- 
tions of woe against Pharisees. 3. Parables, setting 
forth the nature of kingdom of heaven, the duties and 
relations of its individual members. 4. Short sayings, pithy 
statements often repeated. Self-testimony of Christ in 
John, is contained in long discourses ; in Sjm. it consists 
in the titles he assumes (e. g. Son of David, Son of Man, 
Son of God), and claims which he makes, (e. g. to for- 
give sins, to raise dead, to judge, &c.) 

1. Son of God. Expressions most frequent in John. 
Theories, a. Lowest, Pantheistic. Strauss and Baur. 
Great truth of Christ's teaching was universal fatherhood 
of God, as contrasted with the vindictive Jehovah of O. 
T. Christ's conviction of God's love to man and man's 



94 



dependence upon God, raised him to his high plane of 
thought, but being unacquainted with Pantheistic phi- 
losophy, he erred in conceiving of God as a personal 
being. As most vividly apprehending the fatherhood of 
God, he is styled son of God. b. Ewald. By this title 
Christ claimed nothing divine. Only higher, purer, 
religious union with God. To him w T as given a perfect 
divine communication, making him conscious (1) that 
there was to be a perfected rule of God upon the earth, 
(2) that he was to introduce it as its king. c. Orthodox 
view. Christ, Son of God, lyy eternal generation. 

2. Son of Man. Expression occurs 78 times in gospels, 
and but 4 times out of them. Christ's chosen term for 
himself. It is applied to him by others but twice. Theo- 
ries, a. At first, expressive merely of essential human- 
ity and humiliation, of the fact that Christ's sympathies 
unite him as a brother, to all men. 

Change occurs toward close of his ministry and the 
title is used as containing Messianic force. Comp. Mt. 
24 : 30; 26: 64 with Dan. 7 : 13, 14, a Messianic predic- 
tion, b. Title denoted Christ was ideal man, nothing 
superhuman. Gess remarks, this view irreconcilable 
with Christ's constant claims of divine attributes, c. 
Orthodox. kt The Son of Man," above other men, dis- 
tinguished by some peculiarity, which may be discovered 
by considering what is predicted of him, viz., divine 
honors, prerogatives, etc. 

Why does Christ employ this title ? 1. Ans : Incognito 
to hide his real divine nature till men should be prepared 
to accept him. So Ewald, Bleek. 2. A mere circumlo- 
cution for Jesus, with which it is interchanged. 3. Used 
to set forth Christ's Messiahship. The title " Messiah" 
could not be employed because of the false ideas of the 
people respecting it. Had he assumed this title men 
would have expected him to fulfill their wrong concep- 
tions. Jesus would noc be called Christ until late in his 
life. Only once did he call himself "the Christ;" and 
that was at his trial and led to his condemnation. The 
title evidently contains the two ideas of exaltation and 
humiliation. After the Resurrection it was not used by 
the disciples. It is evidently based on Ps. 8, and Ban. 
7 : 13, 14. Gess sees a reference to the Protevangelium, 
Gen. 3 : 15. 



95 

The expressions "kingdom of heaven," "kingdom of 
God," should also be noticed. " Kingdom of God " is 
employed by Mk., Lk. and John. Matt, used the phrase 
but twice. His expression is Kingdom of Heaven (zeou 
obfiavwv, plur., Heb. form, alluding to different spheres.) 
Some regard the two expressions as identical. Heaven 
is put for God as being the place of his dwelling. This, 
however, does not explain Matt.'s exclusive use of one. 
Others, therefore, say the phrase " kingdom of heaven " 
is used by Matt, to contrast the new stage of God's rule 
with that of O. T. theocracy, i. e. gospel is heavenly ful- 
fillment of God's rule on earth. "Kingdom of God" is 
equally applicable to both dispensations. The same 
essential idea is, however, involved in both. Diff. views 
held as to what Christ intended to do in establishing "the 
kingdom" : 1. Infidel. Christ attempted to establish an 
earthly kingdom, to free the Jews, but perished in the 
attempt. 2. Rationalistic, a, He aimed at political 
regeneration. Seeing that social reform was necessary 
to this, he became a moralist, b, Christ at first held the 
same view as Pharisees. Gradually his mistaken ideas 
were corrected, and he sought to carry on a spiritual 
work. Kenan : Christ vacillates between these two views 
of his work, the Pharisaic and Spiritual. 3. Accommo- 
datiom-Schleiermacher, Schenkel : The aim which Christ 
had in his mind was simply to found as a teacher a moral, 
spiritual system. He however accommodated himself in 
his instructions to the popular misconceptions of the 
people with regard to the theocracy. Either he, like the 
people, was blinded by misunderstanding, or he made 
use of their false notions to elevate them. 

Sermon on the Mount. Christ now gives a fuller and 
more orderly arranged specimen of his teaching than he 
had previously afforded the people. The time has now 
come for a more complete revelation, that friends and 
foes may be separated and the gospel system somewhat 
consolidated. Place. According to tradition the Mt. of 
Beatitudes, a lime-stone ridge 7 or 8 m. S. W. of Cap'm, 
called Kurn Hattin on account of its two peaks. To this 
identification Robinson objects that the Mt. is too far 
distant from Cap'm to be consistent with Matt. 8 : 5 and 
Lk. 7 : 1. The tradition, also, is only in the Latin church 



96 

and from the 13th century. Matt, and Lk. differ. As 
to. place, Mt. says, "went up into a mountain and sat;" 
Lk., "came down and stood in the plain," Mt. however 
uses to bpoz in a wide sense— a mountain district. Christ 
'•went up to pray," (Lk. 6 : 12) and came down, i. e. part 
way, to the level plain between the two peaks, and taught. 
As to time, Mt. places it at commencement of Gal. min- 
istry; Lk. puts it some months later in connection with 
the call of the Twelve. The miracle following in Mt. is 
healing of leper ; in Lk., healing of centurion's servant. 
In length, Mt. gives 107 verses ; Lk. but 30. The accounts 
resemble one another in the facts that both are mountain 
sermons occurring early in Gal. ministry; that the begin- 
ning and close are alike in both, and the drift of thought 
is the same. Theories of the relation, between the two. 1. 
Two accounts of the same sermon, blurred and distorted 
b}^ tradition. Some follow Mt. as most complete, others 
Luke as presenting fewest difficulties. 2. Conscious 
selection lies at base of differences; one discourse pur- 
posely varied by Evangelists ; Lk. omits what was special 
to Jews. This coincides with differences, but does not 
offer an adequate explanation. 3. Common. One dis- 
course; Lk.'s account historical as Christ gave it ; Mt.'s 
an amplification by additions grouped from other dis- 
courses, analogous to Mt.'s plan in parables. A specimen 
of Christ's teaching. Objection to this is the unity of 
Mt.'s account. Calvin and Neander hold that both 
Mt. and Lk. give specimens of Christ's teaching. 4. 
Two discourses on same occasion, the one esoteric 
(Mt.'s) to the disciples, the other exoteric (Lk.'s) to 
the multitude. (So Augustine, Lange). Objections : 
There is nothing esoteric in Mt. Christ makes no 
distinction of this kind in his teaching. 5. Two dis- 
tinct, yet similar discourses. Christ repeats the same 
truths because the circumstances and the wants of 
the people were the same. (So Dr. Alexander.) The 
choice lies between the third and fifth view. At all 
events, Christ gave a discourse at the time of calling the 
Twelve. 

Desir/n of the Sermon, and Connection with the History. 
The design of the discourse was to show the nature of the 
Messiah's kingdom. Christ can.e preaching a kingdom 



97 

and repentance. Naturally it would be asked, what is 
this repentance, what this kingdom, what its relations to 
Pharisaic ideas and to 0. T. economy ? There was need 
of explanation, that the people might know to what they 
were committing themselves. Christ in this discourse 
gives it, removing all erroneous views and false inter- 
pretations of his work. Some have mistakenly thought 
that Christ here sets forth a system of theology, others, 
a system of Ethics. The sermon was related to Pharisaic 
errors in teaching in opposition to them that member- 
ship in God's kingdom was dependent not upon external 
circumstances but upon personal character; that the Law 
was to be observed not in a formal manner but in its 
spirit. Three main divisions : 1. Ch. 5 : 1-16, character of 
members ; characteristics required, spiritual. 2. Ch. 5 : 
17-6. Claims of kingdom, a, 5 : 17-48, moral requisi- 
tions : 5, ch. 6, religious requisites. 3. Ch. 7, exhortations 
to true life ; temptations and dangers, how avoided. The 
effect was astonishment (Mt. 7 : 29) " for he taught them 
as one having authority." Sceptics view this discourse 
as genuine, making an exception in its favor. They 
regard Christ as teaching an ethical and religious system. 
They draw a contrast between its free tone and the later 
dogma of Paul and other Apostles. Hence Christian 
dogma was a late invention. Christ taught morals, not 
doctrine. Such is true Christianity, love to God as our 
Father, to our brother-man as to ourself. Ans : 1. Dis- 
course was not intended to be a full system, but adapted 
to the comprehension of the people. 2. Adapted to its 
position in history of redemption. Revelation corres- 
ponds to the period in which it is given. 3. Completed 
Christian doctrine is based, on life, death and resurrection 
of Christ, hence could not be brought forward at this 
stage. 4. Unity of truth is always preserved, although 
it is more definitely stated from time to time. O. T. and 
Christ's teaching involved all fundamental doctrines. 
In the Epistles, however, they assume a more analytic 
form. 

That the discourse is Evangelical not Ethical, as Skep- 
tics assert, is seen : 1. Because its standard of spiritual- 
ity is so high that supernatural aid is required. Need 
of forgiveness is shown. Christ must be sought and this 
search is to be by means. 



98 

2. Righteousness is distinguished from moral right 
because it is connected with Christ's kingdom. His per- 
son is involved in his work. His disciples are spoken 
of as those having purity. 

The discourse was an evangelical restatement of Law 
of Moses, and a preparation for the gospel. 

§42. Miracles. Mt. 8: 5-13; Lk. 7: 1-10. Healing Cen- 
turion's servant. Capernaum. §42, 43, resume the subject 
of miracles. All centurions mentioned in N. T. appear 
in a favorable light. Mt, 8 : 5, he loved Jewish nation 
and built a synagogue. Though a heathen Christ de- 
clared of him, " I have not found so great faith, no not 
in Israel." Comp. centurion at crucifixion (Mk. 15 : 39; 
Lk. 23: 47.), Cornelius (Act. 10: 1.), Julius (Acts 27 : 1.) 
(Smith's Diet. p. 406 ) Legion contained about 6000 in- 
fantry, with a varying proportion of cavalry. It " was 
subdivided into ten cohorts ("baud," Acts 10: 1), the 
cohort into three maniples, and the maniple into two 
centuries, containing originally 100 men, as the name 
implies, but subsequently from 50 to 100 men, according 
to the strength of the legion." (Smith's Diet. Army p. 
162.) Gal., was garrisoued with Roman soldiery ; Her- 
od's bodyguards, and those farming imperial revenues. 

New features in this miracle. I. Intercessory faith. 
Master prays for his servant. 2. Striking greatness of 
faith. ' As his servants obeyed his word, so disease 
would obey the word of Christ.' 3. It was a Gentile's 
faith. This is first recorded instance of individual heal- 
ing, outside the chosen people, hence intercession of 
Jewish elders is sought. (Lk. 7: 3.) Christ praises this 
Gentile's faith, as greater than any in Israel, and applies 
this fact by declaring 'Many Gentiles shall be called, 
many children of the kingdom cast off' (Mt. 8: 11-12.) 
Objections. 1. Mt, says centurion came in person to 
Christ : Lk. he sent through the elders, then through 
friends, but had no personal interview. Ans. " Qui 
facit per alium, facit per se." " What one does by his 
agent, he does himself." Mt. dwells on mere fact of 
miracle as displaying great faith ; Lk. goes into detail. 
(Robin. Gk. Harm. p. 198.) 2. Christ lacks either sin- 
cerity or foreknowledge. He starts for house, but does 
not go to it ; either did not intend going and practiced 



deception, or changed his mind, because ignorant of what 
he was about to do. Ans. This assumes Christ was 
bound to disclose all his intentions. No inconsistency 
in Christ's not knowing things about to happen. To 
his human consciousness things came as to ours. 

§43. Lk. 7: 11-17. Raising son of widow of Nain. Lk. 
8 : 1-3, narrates a second general circuit of Gal. Some 
hold this refers to prospective journey, undertaken 
near close of ministry. Common view (Andrews, Wiese- 
ler,) the reference in Lk. is retrospective, summing up 
the events narrated in §§ 43-47. Exegesis favors this 
interpretation. " Nam, the modern Nein is situated on 
the northwestern edsre of the ' Little Hermon,' where the 
ground falls into the plain of Esdraelon." The entrance 
must always have been up the steep ascent from the 
plain, and here, on the west side of the village, the rock 
is full of sepulchral caves. (Smith's Diet. p. 2058.) Christ 
approaches Nain attended by many disciples, and much 
people. Style of gospel description simple, beautiful, 
impressive " only son of his mother, and she was & widow." 
This was only time Christ was ever in plain of Esdraelon. 

This class of miracles manifest Christ's power over 
departed spirits and attest his claim to be source of life, 
physical and spiritual. Three cases of this kind are 
recorded, each exhibiting more striking power than the 
preceding, viz., Jairus' daughter, from death bed; 
Widow's son, from the bier; Lazarus, from the tomb. 
Chronological order. Widow's son, Jairus' daughter, 
Laz. Sceptical theories concerning these miracles. 1. Natu- 
ralistic. Cases of suspended animation ; death only ap- 
parent : pretended miracle, only resuscitation. 

2. Mythical. Mere inventions of early church to make 
Christ's life accord with O. T. prophecy, and type. 

Effect: all feared, glorified God, saying "Great 
Prophet has arisen," " God has visited Israel." Christ's 
fame spread not only through Judea, but through whole 
" region round about." 

§44. Opposition. Mt. 11: 2-19; Lk. 7: 18-35. Mes- 
sage of John Bap. In this section renewal of opposition is 
occasioned by Bap's disciples, and continues to §50. Mt. 
places this narrative after sending out the Twelve, but 
this is too late, for during absence of Twelve, John 



100 

was beheaded ; Mk. 6 : 30 ; Mt. 14 : 13. Lk's order is 
therefore best. The report of Christ's miracles was the 
occasion of Bap's message. John was imprisoned at 
Machaerus, "on the borders of the desert, N-. of Dead 
Sea, on frontiers of Arabia," " identified with the ruins 
WKauer" Fathers say John did not doubt himself, but 
sent to Christ that his disciples might be satisfied. But 
that Bap. was, at least to some extent, staggered and per- 
plexed by Christ's method of developing his work, is 
evident from fact of Christ's answer being addressed not 
to disciples, but John himself. Message expresses im- 
patience mingled with distrust. He was languishing in 
prison, multitudes of others were being relieved and 
blessed by miracles ; he, the forerunner, was forgotten, 
" was this really the Christ, or should they look for 
another ?" (Farrar Vol. L, p. 289.) Christ's only reply 
is reference to his miracles, thus showing estimate he put 
upon them : His works were equivalent to assertion of 
divinity. John Bap. was greatest prophet because of his 
position as kt index-finger of 0. T." 

Christ received by the people, but Pharisees and law- 
yers doubted (Lk. 7 : 29.) 

§45. Mt. 11 : 20-30. Upbraids the cities. Disciples of 
John having returned to him, Christ gives his estimate 
of the reception he had met in Gal. The same, or a simi- 
lar denunciation of woes is recorded in Lk. 10 : 13, in 
connection with sending out seventy. Exact location of 
these cities is unknown ; probably W. shore Sea of Gal. 
Their rejection of Christ contrasted with ancient heathen 
opposition to theocracy, viz., Tyre and Sidon, Sodom and 
Gomorrah. There is no record of a single miracle, 
wrought in Bethsaida or Chorazin, yet the Evangelist 
says these were the cities u wherein most of his mighty 
works were done." 

§46. Lk. 7 : 36-50. Anointing by a woman. This took 
place at either Cap., Nain, Magdala. It differs from the 
case recorded by Mt,, Mk., John as this is early in his 
ministry ; that, in last week of his life. Romish tradition 
considers this woman the Mary Magdelene, mentioned 
a few verses later (Lk. 8 : 2) and makes her the repre- 
sentative of penitent frailty. This idea is. based wholly 
on mere juxtaposition, there being nothing definite to 



101 

show that these are necessarily the same person, or that 
seven devils were demons of impurity. This incident 
contrasts with Christ's previous treatment, (§45,) is as- 
sociated with new instance of opposition, and gives rise 
to Christ's first parable : the two debtors. (Farrar Vol. 
I., p. 296.) 

§47. Lk. 8 : 1-3. Second circuit in Gal. General state- 
ment, summing up results of the journey, begun §43, 
giving Christ's mode of living and travelling, and his 
household, viz. the Twelve, and certain women, Mary of 
Magdala (W. of Cap.,) Joanna of Herod's household etc. 
Connection ; Love and devotion of these attendants con- 
trasted with rejection and opposition of Pharisees and 
masses. Christ was supported by free-will offerings. 

§48. Mk. 3: 19-30; Mt. 12: 22-37; Lk. 11: 14, 15, 
17-23. Healing blind and dumb demoniac. Events of §§48- 
56 occur during a single day, the great day of parables, 
which opens with cure of demoniac. Lk. records this 
cure in ch. 11. during period of last journeys to Jerus. 
Two methods of harmonizing with Mt. 1. Cases are the 
same. Then must follow Mt's order because he gives 
distinct note of time, ch. 13 : 1, " that same day." 2. 
Cases are analogous. (Andrews p, 365.) Historical re- 
sult is unchanged by either method. Collision with 
Pharisees did occur at this time, and only question is, 
was it repeated? ^"ote intense excitement that was pre- 
vailing. Mk. 3 : 21, Christ's friends think him insane, 
endeavor to put him under restraint; ordinary meals in- 
terrupted, multitudes coming together " so they could 
not so much as eat bread," (Mk. 3 : 20 ;) Christ goes to 
sea-side, is compelled to enter a boat to address them; 
crowds ascribe to him Messianic titles. " Is not this the 
Son of David?" Pharisees alarmed, unable to gainsay 
the miracles, impute them to agency of Satan. Mk. 3 : 
22 " the scribes which came down from Jerus." shows 
Christ was being watched by Jewish authorities, and the 
present opposition was official. Beelzebub, name of 
Philistine deitv, meaning "Fly ^od " Pharisees change 
to Beelzeboul, i. e., " Dung god." Christ's reply. 1. 
Ad hominum argument, " If I by Beelzeboul cast out 
devils, by whom do you?" Reference to incantations 
and exorcisms of Rabbinical Schools. 2. Parable of 



103 

Definition of Parable — an illustration of moral or reli- 
gious truth derived from analogy of common experience. 
It differs from the Fable in that " in the latter, qualities 
or acts of a higher class of beings may be attributed to 
a lower (e. g. those of men to brutes); while in the for- 
mer, the lower sphere is kept perfectly distinct from that 
which it seems to i'lustrate." Meander: It differs from 
the Myth " in being the result of conscious deliberate 
thought, not the growth of unconscious realism, personi- 
fying attributes, appearing, no one knows how, in popu- 
lar belief." It differs from the Proverb in that " it must 
include a similitude of some kind, while the Proverb 
may assert without a similitude, some wide generaliza- 
tion of experience." It differs from the Allegory, in 
that the latter really involves no comparison. Parable 
may be wholly fictitious or partly based on real events. 

Three great groups, distinctly marked in gospels: 1. 
Seven in Mt. 13, illustrate nature of kingdom of Heaven. 
2. Lk. Chs. 12-18, set forth immediate, personal relations 
of the individual believer to God. 3. Mt. 25, those 
pointing to Judgment and consummation of the king- 
dom. These groups are supplemental in their relation 
to one another. First group contains five fundamental 
truths. 1. Sower and seed. Varied reception of gospel 
truth, by different classes of hearers. 2. Tares and 
wheat. Evil springs up among the good. 3. Mustard 
seed, Leaven. Growth of church externally, internally. 
4. Hid treasure, Pearl of great price. Value of kingdom, 
necessity of sacrifice. 5. Net. Gathering of all kinds; 
mixed condition of visible church until end of world. 
Skeptics reject Tares, and Net. because they imply con- 
scious divinity of Christ, and contain the late ideas of 
imperfection in the church. They assert Mk.'s parable 
of seed growing secretly, is derived from that of the 
Sower. Bengel says these Parables form outline of 
Church History. Lange carries this idea to extreme, 
viz. Sower, Apostolic Age ; Tares, Ancient Cath. Church; 
Mustard seed: State church under Constantine ; Leaven, 
Mediaeval Church ; Hid Treasure, Reformation ; Pearl, 
Christianity vs. world ; Net, Final Judgment. A nat- 
ural transition is observable running through all seven. 
They illustrate self conscious divinity of Christ: field is 



102 

strong man armed. If Christ by Satan was casting" out 
devils, he must first have couquered Satan. 3. Warns 
them against the unpardonable sin. 4. Denounces them 
as generation of vipers, seed of serpent, i. e. children of 
Satan in their nature, opinions, actions. 

§49. Mt. 12 : 38-45 ; Lk. 11 : 16, 24-36. Pharisees seek 
a sign. In face of all Christ's miracles they demand some 
evidence of Messiahship that will accord with their per- 
verted Messianic notions. Mt.'s order is preferred to 
Lk.'s, because Ch. 12 : 46 chronological sequence is given, 
" while he yet talked." Christ refused sign. He had 
already furnished ample miraculous proof of Messianic 
claims. 

Parable of seven spirits, refers to present condition 
of people. Apparently changed in feeling toward 
Christ, they would shortly become more hostile toward 
him, than ever before. Shows that Christ was not misled 
by their seeming and probablv sincere faith. 

§50. Mt. 12 : 46-50 ; Mk 3 : 31-35 ; Lk. 8 : 19-21. 
Mother and brethren desire to speak with him, his increas- 
ing popularity and antagonism to the Pharisees giving 
them concern about him. He shows his earthly relations 
typify his spiritual relations to every true believer. 
Great advance in Pharisaic opposition ; charge of blas- 
phemy has been made and retorted. 

§§54, 55. Teaching. Mt, 13. Mk. 4. Lk. 8 : 4-16. 
Great day of Parables. Syn. here mark decided change 
and advance in Christ's teaching. It was necessary 
Christ should still instruct the people, but in order to 
blind opposition, truth must be clothed in parabolic form, 
that his enemies may not employ his words against him. 

Four general subjects twice repeated characterize the 
ministry in E. Gal. up to this point: 

1. Organization, §29 and §40; 2. Miracles, §§30-33 
and §§42-43; 3. Opposition, §§S4-39 and §§44-50; 4. 
Teaching §41 and §§54-55. 

Christ employs parables. 1. Symbolic method awakens 
imagination, excites interest, exercises memory and 
judgment. 2. " To him that hath shall be given." The 
recipients of God's grace, will be able to recognize his. 
truth even when clothed in symbolic form. What is 
grace to believer, becomes judicial condemnation to un- 
believer. Is. 6 : 9 is thus fulfilled. (See Mt. 13 : 11-15.) 



104 

the world, he sends his angels, he separates. He might 
naturally in Parable have referred to God, but avoids 
doing so. Christ's exposition of Sower and Tares is 
model of interpretation. Spiritual lesson should not be 
sought in every particular, some details serving merely 
to keep up connection. Fathers attempted to spiritualize 
all the minutiae. Mt. 13 : 36, Christ's going into the 
house makes apparent division in his discourse, parables 
spoken before being addressed to people in general, 
those afterward to his disciples only. Common 
opinion is that these parables were all delivered 
upon one day. Though this hypothesis is not neces- 
sary, there is certainly marked unity in these teachings. 
Note. §§48-56— one day: §57 one day: §§58-60 
one day. These three days though possibly not succes- 
sive, are not widely separated. 

§56. Miracles. Mt 8 : 18-27 ; Mk. 4 : 35-41 : Lk. 
8 : 22-25 ; 9 : 57-62. Crossed the Lake on evening of 
same day, to escape crowds and avoid Pharisees. Cer- 
tain man desires to follow Christ. He replies ' k Foxes 
have holes." Christ's poverty should not be exagger- 
ated ; it was voluntary, not forced, v. 60. Christ's ser- 
vice supersedes everything conflicting with it. New 
class of Miracles introduced, those over nature, teaching 
Christ's care and deliverance of his followers from dan- 
ger. E. side urge Christ to depart, on W. beg him to 
remain. 

§57. Mt. 8 : 28-34; Mk. 5 : 1-21 ; Lk. 8 : 26-40. 
Demoniacs at Gadara. Text differs as to name of place. 
This case, palpable proof of individuality of devils. First 
recorded visit to E. of Lake ; preparation for further 
sojourn. Tells demoniacs to publish cures, because here 
Christ was beyond the reach of Pharisees, and the report 
would prepare for his subsequent visit. Swine shows 
region outside Jewish influence. Their destruction no 
part of the miracle. Mt. mentions two demoniacs, others 
but oue. Note contrast, dwellers on E. of Lake urge 
Christ to depart, on W. beg him to remain. 

§58. Mt. 9 : 10-17 ; Mk. 2 : 15-22 ; Lk. 5 : 29-39. 
Levi's feast. Not positively successive; most think so. 
WieseIer,Ellicott, Tischendorf, synchronize it with call of 
Mt. Mt. gives feast on account of Christ's intended de- 



105 

parture from Gal. Two new charges from Pharisees, 
and disciples of John Bap.: a. Eating with publicans 
and sinners. O. T. regulations insisted upon social 
severance ; no Jew was permitted to eat with those cer- 
emonially unclean, b. Christ and his disciples neglect 
fasting. Former charges were, Christ's making himself 
equal to God, breaking Sabbath, casting out devils by 
Beelzebub. 

§59. Mt. 9: 18-26; Mk. 5: 22-43; Lk. 8: 41-56. 
Jairus conies whilst Christ was conversing with disciples 
of John, at Levi's feast. On way to Jairus' house, heals 
woman with bloody issue. Peculiarity of cure, is mode 
of approach. "Virtue (duvafitv) had gone out of him" 
does not signify emanation of unconscious power. Christ, 
voluntarily performed the cure. 'Trouble not the mas- 
ter' Lk. 8 : 49, indicates respect of higher classes for 
Jesus. Privacy of raising of Jairus' daughter was due 
to Pharisaical opposition. 

§60. Mt. 9 : 27—34. Two blind men and dumb demoniac. 
Organic disease symbolizing darkness of mind. v. 27 
" Son of David," Messianic title used as argument to ob- 
tain cure, for first time. v. 28 " Yea, Lord" — Christ re- 
quires faith, v. 34. Blasphemous charge of Pharisees 
reiterated. 

§62. Mt. 9:35-38; 10:1,5-42; 11 : 1 ; Mk. 6 : 6-13; 
Lk. 9: 1-6. Third circuit in Gal Christ now sends out 
the Twelve. Opposition had become dangerous. The 
crisis of his life was fast approaching. Whatever he 
would do to impress the people of Gal. must be done 
quickly. Design of mission of Twelve, a. To facilitate 
making such impression. Their mission a practical com- 
ment on his own words, ' Harvest plenty, laborers few.' 
b. To exercise apostles in independent action. Fourth 
step in organization of his kingdom. They still held the 
erroneous ideas common to the people, so Christ now 
begins to separate them from the world. On their re- 
turn, he retires with them to the desert for further in- 
struction, c. To acquaint the people with apostles, as 
those who had been with him from the first. Their 
commission was temporary and national. Their circuit 
ended, their miraculous power creased. Into any 
Samaritan village they were not to enter. Plenary apos- 



106 

tolic authority conferred at Pentecost. Subject of their 
teaching was, ' Kingdom of heaven at hand.' Their 
miracles were limited to acts of healing. Anointing 
with oil, oil being type of Holy Spirit, shewed that they 
were mere instruments, and made prominent in people's 
minds the Spirit's agency. Disciples were to be supported 
by those to whom they were sent. Mt. 10 : 16 contains 
reference to future opposition Christ knew he was to 
encounter. First reference to coming trials. 

Note prominent place given to his person and author- 
ity ; whole work of disciples derives its authority from 
him, its trials are to be borne for his sake. 

§63. Mt. 14: 1-2, 6-12; Mk. 6: 14-16; Lk. 9: 7-9. 
Death of John Baptist. Date of death rightly inferred to 
be just prior to third Pass., after feeding- 5000, 

Duration of his imprisonment depends on feast of John 
5:1. If Pass., then 16 months (Robinson), if not it 
varies from 5 months to 3 weeks. John Bap. dies before 
seeing the establishment of the kingdom he had heralded. 
His early ministry had been full of glory, its end is filled 
with gloom. His fate accords with his life. It was well 
that an ascetic, a preacher of repentance, a pioneer for 
righteousness sake, should die a martyr. His life had 
been long enough to disclose the unity of his work and. 
Christ's ; his death turned popular attention to Jesus. 
As his imprisonment had caused Christ to withdraw from 
Judea, his death led him to retire into the wilderness. 

§64. Mt. 14: 13-21; Mk. 6, 30-34; Lk. 9 : 10-17; John 
6: 1-14. Return of Twelve. Feeding of 5000. John now 
parallel with Syn. Twelve begin to return from their 
mission, the disciples of John Bap. report their master's 
death, hence Christ withdraws to N. E. side of Lake, for 
rest and safety. Lk. 9 : 10 : Place belonged to a city 
called Bethsaida. Common opinion is there were two 
Bethsaidas, Bethsaida of Gal., Bethsaida Julias. Others 
think there was but one, built upon both sides of the 
Jordan : but this is improbable, no bridge being men- 
tioned, and a ferry would have been very dangerous. 
Bethsaida was an easy resort from Cap. and crowds fol- 
lowed him, having seen him embark, going around the 
Lake, by land. Christ was moved with compassion for 
them, because they were as sheep having no shepherd, 



107 

their only teachers being Pharisees. He therefore spends 
the entire day in giving instruction. 

The nearness of the Passover accounts for the con- 
course of such multitudes in that out-of-the-way place. 
Beside 5,000 men, there being women and children, there 
must have been congregated at least 10,000 souls. Their 
orderly arrangement in companies, prevented all con- 
fusion, and imposture. One of Christ's greatest miracles ; 
a species of creation ; extensive multiplication of created 
things. 

Skeptics note following differences in the accounts : 
1. As to place. Desert place, yet in vicinity of city. 
John says a mountain. 2. As to conversation. Syn., 
make the disciples the first tu mention feeding the multi- 
tudes, John makes Jesus first to speak. 3. Repetition 
of feeding multitudes recorded b} 7 Syn. increases diffi- 
culty of accepting either as genuine. These difficulties, 
and the inconceivableness (to skeptics) of a miracle 
displaying such creative power, have led to unusual effort 
to explain it away. 

1. Mythical explanation. ISTo such actual event occurred. 
Christ's discourse concerning his body, John 6. fur- 
nished mythical basis for current tradition. Strauss 
finds its mythical origin, in manna of O. T. and in the 
analogous miracles of Elijah, (1 King 17,) and Elisha (2 
Kings 4.) 2. Naturalistic explanation. Christ excited charity 
among those in the caravan journeying to feast, to sup- 
ply from their store of provisions those fainting with 
hunger. Some say it was originally a parable of Christ's, 
relating to spiritual food, transformed into a narrative; 
others imagine that Mt. has unwittingly recorded two 
separate traditions of the same occurrence. Olshausen 
and Lange,. note the compressing into a single instant of 
the man} 7 gradual processes of nature and of art; not 
only the growth of the grain, but also the preparation 
of the food. Effect of this miracle (John 6: 14.): Peo- 
ple apply Messianic titles to Christ, and attempt to force 
him to adopt their views of the Messiahship, and to com- 
pel him to be their king. Lange remarks "the rabble 
think they have found their Bread King.'" Disciples em- 
bark to cross the lake. The people are sent away. 
Christ goes apart into a mountain to pray. §65. Omit- 
ted. 



108 

§66. John 6 : 22 — 1 : 1. Discourse in Synagogue at 
Capernaum. Only extended passage in John's gospel, 
the scene of which is laid in Gal. John not only accords 
with the Syn. in giving the miracle, bat also makes the 
same crises in Christ's life and same effect produced on 
his followers. Morning after the miracle, the multitudes 
missing Christ and his disciples, follow him to Caper- 
naum. This is culmination of ministry in E. Gal. False 
Messianic excitement has been aroused by the miracle of 
the loaves. Christ therefore, in the synagogue at Cap. 
delivers a searching discourse calculated to separate the 
spiritual from the sensual among the crowds that followed 
him, thus drawing nearer to himself the true disciples 
and driving away the mere carnally minded. He unfolds 
the true character of his kingdom ; its blessings spiritual, 
not material. Miracle furnishes theme of the discourse; 
earthly food is not to be sought, but himself, the bread 
which came down from heaven, v. 63. '• The words 
that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life," 
is the key-note of the entire discourse. Three divisions: 
1. ch. 6: 27-51. This the work of God, men should be- 
lieve on Christ, and feed upon his flesh. Whosoever 
comes to Him shall not be cast out, but shall obtain eternal 
life. 2. Ch. 6 : 51-56: Comment on preceding statements. 
Christ's flesh, the true bread from heaven. 3. Ch. 6 : 
59-71. Effect of discourse: multitudes are offended and 
desert him. 

Never before, save to Nicoclemus, had Christ declared 
that he came down from heaven. He claims the power 
to impart spiritual life. This discourse from a mere man 
would have been blasphemy and folly. This was a test 
event for his own apostles, v. 67 " Will ye also go 
away ?" Peter answers v. 68 " To whom shall we go ?" 
"Thy words are hard but it is a question of despair with 
us," (v. 69) " we believe and are sure that thou art that 
Christ." First time the title of Messiah passed between 
Christ and his most intimate friends. 

Critics object to this discourse as unhistorical ; could 
not have been delivered previous to institution of Lord's 
Supper, must have been wholly unintelligible both to 
Christ and apostles, until that event. Peter's confession 
of Christ's divinitv is out of place before Pentecost. 



109 

Ans : The very mystery and difficulty of this discourse 
adapt it to the end for which it was intended, the sifting of 
believers from unbelievers. Christ shows (vv. 70,71,) 
that this discriminating process must be applied even to 
the Twelve. " Have I not chosen you twelve, and one 
of you is a devil ?' : 

John 7: 1 closes the ministry in E. Gal., and indicates 
the extent. to which opposition had increased during this 
period, by the statement that Christ " would not walk 
in Jewry " and was unable to attend the approaching 
passover " because the Jews sought to kill Him."' 

THE MINISTRY IN NORTHERN GALILEE. 

Second Period. 

Duration of the Period: From the third Passover (coin- 
cident with death of the Baptist) to the Feast of Taber- 
nacles, six months later. The record is contained in Mt. 
14: 13; 18: 35; Mk. 6: 30: 9: 50; Luke 9: 10-56. 
John gives all in one verse, 7:1, which corresponds with 
the statement of the Synoptists. It is a period of great 
journeyings. The order of events in the Syn. is perfect. 
This is because the period is shorter, and there is less 
room for variations. Then the subjects of conversation 
are closely connected with the historic events. 

Characteristics of the Period : 1. Dangerous opposition 
causing Christ's withdrawal from Capernaum. 2. This 
withdrawal widened the sphere of action. Instead of 
remaining in Capernaum he now goes into Phoenicia, 
then into Decapolis, passing up the Jordan to Caesarea 
Philippi. He had two ends in view : a. To avoid dan- 
ger ; b. to extend his usefulness. Besides, his passing 
the borders of the Holv Land signified the callino; of the 
Gentiles. 3. His teachings assumed a new character. 
For the first time he teaches publicly his death and resur- 
rection. 

Object of the Period: To strengthen the faith of his dis- 
ciples. Hence he uses express terms to teach his Mes- 
siahship, in contrast with the preceding period. The 
disciples are now taught rather than the people. The 
main point was to prepare them for his approaching 
death. The central event of the preceding period was 



110 

the Sermon on the Mount; of this period, the Transfig- 
uration. The events on these Mountains mark the 
beginning and end of the Galilean ministry. 

§67. Christ justifies his disciples for eating with unwashed 
hands. This charge of the Pharisees shows the strict 
watch they kept over Christ's actions. The previous 
charge was Sabbath-breaking. Now he is charged with 
disregarding the traditions of the Jews on which the 
Pharisees laid so much stress. Christ applies to them, 
Isa. 29: 13, and warns the multitude against this ritual 
burden. Yide Mt. 15 : 1-20 . Mk. 7 : 1-23. 

§68. The daughter of a Syro-Phatnician woman healed. 
Mt, 15: 21-28;' Mk. -7: 24-30. The border between 
Galilee and Phoenicia is called, from its two larger cities, 
Tvre and Sidon. Did Christ go to the borders, or beyond, 
or through? (Mk. 7 : 24.) 

The last view is the best for three reasons : 1. It agrees 
best with the account in Mk. 2. It suits best the pur- 
port of the miracles. 3. It is put almost beyond doubt 
by the amended text — dta Itdcovoc implying through 
Phoenicia.' 

Tyre and Sidon were opponents of the Theocracy. 
Therefore the miracle shows Christ's intended mission to 
the Gentiles. 1. Because the woman is called a Canaan- 
ite, which people belonged originally to the land. 2. 
She is called a Greek, which is the 0. T. name for Gen- 
tile. 3. Christ's own words: t( Iam not sent but unto 
the lost sheep of the house of Israel." 

§69. Healing of the deaf and dumb man. Mt. 15 : 29-38 ; 
Mk. 7: 31-37, 8: 1-9. From Phoenicia Christ passes 
south through Decapolis, inhabited largely by Greeks. 
Some say he came around south of the sea; others that 
he traveled directly east from Phoenicia, It is more proba- 
ble that he went north as far as Damascus, thus preparing 
for Paul. The same miracles are renewed because he is 
in a new country. 

But the present miracle has some peculiarities. 1. 
It is the first case of combined deafness and dumbness. 

2. Not an absolute but a partial dumbness — tongue-tied. 

3. The mode of healing — takes the man apart and prays. 
Why ? Because the Messianic question is not prominent, 
and the people are Polytheists. Therefore he wished to 



Ill 

teach them of the true God. Many other miracles were 
wrought, and the effect of them is stated in Mt. 15 : 31. 
Then follows the miracle of feeding- the 4000, wrought 
from compassion for the people far from home, and 
especially to lead them to the true God. 

§70. The Pharisees and Saddueees again require a Sign. 
Mt. 15 : 39 ; 16 : 1-4 ; Mk. 8 : 10-12. Our Lord comes 
back to Capernaum and again to Magdala, a little town 
south of Capernaum. For the first time, the Pharisees 
and Saddueees are united against him, which Lange 
thinks is proof that the Sanhedrim had passed official 
measures against him. For the fourth time the Phari- 
sees seek a sign, and Christ's answer is recorded in Mt. 
16 : 2-3. 

§72. Blind Man of Bethsaida healed. This miracle is 
mentioned by Mark alone. It is private, and the cure is 
gradual, to illustrate, as some think, the gradual enlight- 
enment of the regenerated soul. 

§73. Peter's Confession at Cossarea Philippi. Mt. 16 : 13- 
30; Mark 8: 27-30; Luke 9: 18-21. Luke mentions 
these events because so important. C. Philippi lay at 
the base of Mt. Hermon, which is about 8000 ft. high. 
The sources of the Jordan are here. (Yide Smith's Diet.) 

Result of the Galilean Ministry. As a whole, the 
result has not been to lead any but the disciples to believe 
that he is the Messiah. This truth is not popularly pro- 
claimed. He still enjoins them not to say that he is the 
Christ. But the truth is so clear that it brings out Peter's 
famous confession : " Thou art the Christ, the son of the 
living God." Christ's reply contains ixxArjaca for the first 
time. It is used onlv once besides this in the Gospels. 
(Matt. 18 : 17.) 

The Rationalists confess that the agreement of the 
Evangelists here denotes a crisis in the life of Christ, but 
they dispute as to its nature. Baur and Strauss say that 
" Son of Man " (Mt. 16 : 13) had not before been consid- 
ered a Messianic expression. The change, therefore, was 
from an idea secretly and suddenly entertained by Christ 
to its open profession. Schenkel thinks the crisis to be 
that after this he offered himself for the first time as the 
Messiah. 

But these theories require rejection of the Gospel by 
John, and they subvert the whole history. The only 



112 

thing true is that the claim to be the Messiah had not 
been made prominent before. But the Disciples had 
recognized him as Son of God before this. Vide Mt. 
14 : 83. He now makes his claim public, and goes on to 
teach that his kingdom would be independent of the old 
Theocracy. " Upon this rock will I build my Church." 
That is, the doctrine contained in Peter's confession 
would be its corner-stone. 

§74. Prediction of his Death and Resurrection. Mt. 16 : 
21-28; Mk. 8:31-38; 9:1; Lk. 9 : 22-24. This is a 
new element in Christ's teaching. The Sjm. recognized 
this transition. Our Lord shows them that he had not 
come to set up the material kingdom that they expected, 
but that he was to suffer death. This shocked them, and 
Peter says : " Be it far from thee, Lord." These predic- 
tions are important in three respects : 

1. In correcting the mistaken ideas of his Apostles. 
These predictions prepared them for that suffering which 
they had not anticipated. 

2. In preserving their faith. What would have be- 
come of them when Christ's death came, without these 
predictions ? 

3. Although they did not apprehend his words at the 
time, they did remember them during Passion Week 
(Luke 24 : 7-8). The Divinity of the Savior gleams 
through these predictions in a striking manner. They 
are very minute, a. As to the place — Jerus., which he had 
avoided, b. His death was not to be a local but an offi- 
cial and national event, c. The mode of his suffering 
was predicted. He was to be " put to death " — but was 
to rise again on the third day. 

The Rationalists make strong assaults upon these pas- 
sages. I. They claim discrepancy in the accounts. 1. John 
is enigmatical while the Syn. are plain. 2. John's refer- 
ences cover the whole life, while the Syn. refer only to 
the end. 3. In John the words are addressed to the 
multitude; in the Syn. to the Disciples. 4. Christ ap- 
peals to the O. T. and mistakes its meaning. He avails 
himself of certain Messianic passages which the Ration- 
alists deny to be so. 

Ans : a. Christ appeals to the O. T. as proof only to 
those who believe in the 0. T. b. The objection is based 



113 

on the false assumption that only isolated passages refer 
to the Messiah, whereas the whole O. T., especially the 
whole ceremonial law, refers to Christ. He is the key 
to it all. c. The exegesis on which these discrepancies 
are based is accepted only by unbelieving Jews and 
Rationalists. 

II. Again it is objected that if Christ predicted his 
death in this way, the surprise and vacillation and in- 
credibility of the Disciples, when his trial and death did 
occur, are inexplicable. 

Ans : a. Prophecies however explicit require fulfill- 
ment as the key to their significancy and inspiration. 
Although the second advent of Christ has been foretold, 
how much do we know about it? 

b. Again this was a time of great excitement. The 
Disciples were struck dumb for the moment, and had not 
sufficient calmness to reason about these matters. 

c. The true interpretation of these prophecies contra- 
dicted all their notions of the Messiah. Besides, O. T. 
prophecies were not all to be fulfilled in his present 
advent. 

III. These predictions simply a shrewd forecast. His 
suffering would be at Jerus. because he could bring that 
about. But the question arises, How did Christ know 
he would not be arrested in Galilee, on this theory ? To 
obviate this, Strauss says the whole matter was incorpo- 
rated with the record and is without foundation. 

Intermediate Position of Theistic critics : These predictions 
belong to Cesarean period. Before this Christ had ex- 
pected to convert the nation. But experience taught 
that death was necessary to victory. 

Ans : 1. It is inconsistent with the record in Mt. 12 : 
40 ; 23 : 38, 39. 

2. This theory is inconsistent with itself. For if the 
Resurrection was not an actual fact, why did the 
Apostles suffer martyrdom for their belief in it? 

3. Christ's knowledge of the 0. T. renders it impossi- 
ble (Isa. 49: 3.) The Sceptics themselves claim that he 
got his knowledge from O. T., and by a false exegesis 
applied it to himself. Hence on their own ground he 
had a definite conception of his sufferings and death. 

Another objection attempts to relieve Christ from all 
participation in the theory of the Atonement. But see 



114 

how one Sceptic devours another. For some of them 
say that all such passages are an interpolation, while 
others deny that they teach the Atonement. 

Transition Period. Thus far Christ had addressed the 
Twelve. But he now turns to the multitude. He fore- 
warns them of the cost of following him— great self denial 
required, yet with the rewards of eternal life. But 
those who do not follow him must suffer the loss of their 
souls. (This was the last N. T. passage commented on 
by Dr. Addison Alexander just before his death.) 

§75. The Transfiguration. The events of this section 
occurred about a week after the preceding conversation. 
No difficulty in the fact that Mt. says six days, and Lk. 
eight, for both speak of one week, only one includes, and 
the other excludes, the first and last days. Besides Lk. 
says w^E! = u about." Tradition makes Mt. Tabor in Gal. 
the Mt. of Transiig. But this goes back only to fourth 
cent., and then not to Palestine. Mt. and Mk. say '" a 
hisfh mountain," and Lk. " the mountain." Robinson 
and Stanley object to Tabor bee. at that time occupied 
by a fortified city. Last events occurred in the region 
of Caesarea Philippi. Lightfoot : " Evangelists intimate 
no change of place." Besides. Mk. 9 : 30 says: "And 
departing thence they passed through Galilee," implying 
that they were not then in Gal. Current opinion favors 
Mt. Hermon. 

Taking with him Peter, James and John, he goes into 
the mountain to pray, and then took place the Trans- 
figuration. What the Transfiguration was is a matter of 
much conjecture. It is sufficient to know that Christ's 
personal identity remained. (Farrar, chap. 36.) Peter 
proposed to make three Tabernacles, or tents, that they 
might dwell there. Then a cloud came, which is always 
a sign of Jehovah's presence, and on looking around 
they saw Jesus alone. 

Three-fold design of the Transfiguration : 

1. It afforded the Disciples a new proof from Heaven 
of Christ's divinity, thereby strengthening their faith for 
future conflict. 

2. It was necessary for Christ's own spiritual support 
and comfort, before entering upon the agony and death 
which were near at hand — analogous to the baptism 
before the Temptation. 



115 

3. The design was symbolical — setting forth the nature 
of Christ's kingdom, and the glory that shall follow those 
that suffer for it. A specimen of the heavenly gloiw and 
of the resurrection. Also shows the essential oneness of 
Christ's kingdom with the 0. T. dispensation. Moses 
and Elias representative men — one the giver, the other 
the champion of the Law. These two last points set forth 
in II. Peter 1 : 16-18. Christ charged them to tell no man, 
because the multitudes had not faith to understand the 
scene, and the Disciples themselves could not understand 
" what the rising from the dead should mean." 

In the next four sections, we have a. the healing of the 
demoniac child, b. the second prediction of Christ's 
death and resurrection, c. the miraculous provision of the 
tribute-money, and d. the contentions of the Disciples as 
to who should be greatest in Christ's kingdom. 

LAST JOURNEYS TO JERUSALEM. 

Our Lord now begins his last journey to Jerusalem, 
there to renew the evidence of his Messiahship. The 
time is from Tabernacles to the Passover, six months lack- 
ing one week. 

Why is Luke so full ? a. Because he is supplementary. 
b. It accords with his plan to bring out the personal re- 
lations and human sympathies of Christ. 

The question of Harmony is very difficult, because 
John gives us live chapters which must go into the 
Synoptic narrative. Here is the problem : The Synopt- 
ists, after the Galilean Ministry, relate a journey to Jeru- 
salem as if it were the last. But John records three jour- 
neys : (1) A journey to the feast of Tabernacles in Octo- 
ber, (John 7, 10.) (2) A journey to the Feast of Dedi- 
cation in December (John 10:22-23.) On account of 
opposition Jesus retires to Bethany in Perea, but the 
death of Lazarus brings him to Bethany, near Jerusalem. 
Then on account of further . opposition he retires to 
Ephraim, (John 11: 54.) (3) He sets out from Ephraim 
for Jerusalem " six days before the Passover" (John 12: 
1.) Where was Jesus during the two months between 
the Tabernacles and Dedication ? 

How are these to be harmonized ? It is best to confess 
that we have not enough material to settle tbe question 



116 

satisfactorily. DeWette thinks the chapters in Luke are a 
collection of unhistorical material which the writer did 
not know where to place. Exegetical objections to this 
view : a. The unity of the discourses in Luke. b. All the 
material furnished belongs to this period. Hengstenberg 
thinks no order is discernible between Luke and John. 
Schleiermacher, Olshausen and Neander think that the 
accounts of the two journeys are blended, viz., the 
journeys to the Tabernacle and Passover. The narrative 
of the first two come in at Luke 18: 35. They record 
no conversations or incidents previous to their becoming 
parallel with Luke. 

Greswell makes all the Synoptists connect with the 
last journey in John. Then Luke 9: 51 is parallel with 
John 11 : 55. According to this view the Synoptists 
pass over the period and record only the last journey to 
Jerusalem just before the Passover. By this view the 
unity of Luke is preserved, and the Synoptists appear 
to record only one journey. But the difficulty is that early 
in Luke's narration Christ is brought, into the house of 
Mary and Martha at Bethany, (chap. 10) and then in 
chap. 17 : 11 he is passing through Galilee and Samaria. 
Greswell thinks Luke refers to another village near 
Jerusalem. But this would make the journej' protracted 
and irregular. Again John says our Lord passed some 
time in Ephraim, after raising Lazarus. 

Wieseler fixes on three points in Luke where it is said 
Jesus was going to Jerus. and makes them correspond 
with John's journeys : 

1. To Tabernacles, Luke 9 : 51 compares with John 7: 10. 

2. To Bethanv, " 13 : 22 " " " 11: 1. 

3. To Passover, " 17:11 " " "11:55. 
Arguments for Wieseler's view : It is claimed that the 

narrative in John fits in to the break in Luke, e. g., we 
are told that the journey to the Tabernacles was made 
secret^. This agrees with Luke's statement that he 
went through Samaria. The common way was through 
Perea. The Samaritans reject him because his " face 
was set towards Jerus." Here comes in the parable of 
the good Samaritan. Such striking coincidences all 
through have won over many supporters. Ellicott fol- 
lows it in full. Tischendorf qualifies it by saying that 
it is not so certain as it seems to be. 



117 

Objections. 1. Lack of positive evidence. But in such 
a case we look only for 'probabilities. 2. Luke purports 
to give only one journey. Ans. : Luke does not say there 
was but one journey. 3. Luke 9 : 51 seems to refer to a 
period just before his death. Ans. : Could as well refer 
to the whole period of six months. 4. Luke 13 : 22 must 
mean, it is said, into or up to Jerus. But this interpreta- 
tion denies that c/c ever has the sense of direction. 5. 
The plan implies a sojourn in Jerusalem from the Taber- 
nacles to Dedication. This is said to be contrary to 
John 12: 1. Tischendorf takes an exception to Wieseler 
and makes the Dedication occur in John 10: 22. An- 
drews agrees as to the last two journeys, but makes this 
difference: He considers Luke 9:51 the journey to 
Dedication, and makes it parallel with John 7 : 10, which 
passage he makes refer to a final departure. Objections 
to Andrews: 1. It assumes a new return to Galilee 
after Dedication. 2. It is unnatural to put John 7, 8, 9 
at the close of the Galilean ministry. They belong to 
this period of journeyings. 

Robinson makes Luke 13 : 22 — 19: 28 the last journey ; 
Luke 10: 17 — 11: 33 the journey between Tabernacles 
and Dedication, and Luke 11 : 33 — 13: 10 he puts in the 
ministiw in Eastern Galilee. Objections: 1. It is arbi- 
trary. 2. It breaks up the connection just where com- 
mentators find a striking unity. 3. Robinson himself 
says, " I suggest." The sceptics say that this diversity 
proves the record unhistorical. 

Coincidences of John and Luke : 1. Both represent Jesus, 
after 'the Galilean Ministry, as entering upon an extended 
period of journeyings. 2. Both agree that the region 
was Judea and Perea. 3. Both agree that it was tow- 
ard Jerus. 4. Both agree as to the character of the 
works and teaching, for both refer to a period of hostility 
which brings out declaration of his Divinity. 

Design of the Period: A more open avowal of Mes- 
siahship — at the feast and while journeying. He offers 
himself again at Jerus. and is rejected. Notice the ad- 
vance in the doctrine of his person. He speaks of com- 
ing forth from God; of his pre-existence ; of his one- 
ness with the Father ; of his being the source of life. 
But he still withholds the titles, Messiah and Christ. 



118 

The sphere of labor is now changed from Galilee to 
Judea. In the Synoptists this is brought out in the 
journeyings through Perea. The opposition increases. 
The Pharisees seek to break down his popularity by put- 
ting difficult questions so worded that a direct answer 
would offend one party or another. For example, the 
question about divorce. On the other hand, our Lord 
delivers a series of discourses against the Pharisees, 
warning the people against them. John gives evidence 
of the covert purpose of the Pharisees to put Christ to 
death, John 7: 25. 

Christ now proceeds to give private instruction to his 
disciples, in reference to the change so soon to occur. 
He gives new charges, prophecies and parables. (The 
numbering of the sections, from this point, is irregular, 
but Teschendorf's plan is preferred.) 

§81. Final Departure from Galilee. Luke's expression 
is remarkable : " He steadfastlv set his face to ejo to 
Jerusalem." The journey, was not compulsory but 
voluntary. 

Objections: 1. He said to his brethren that he would 
not go, and afterwards went up secretly (John 7: 8-11.) 
It is claimed that this is either vacillation or deception. 
Ans: Our Lord's words refer to the time and manner of 
his going. Did not say he was not going, but " I go up 
not yet." He refused to go in the public procession. 

2. Again, it is said that the rejection of his messen- 
gers at the Samaritan village (Lk. 9: 53) does not agree 
with the favorable reception in John 4th. 

Ans: The latter was at the beginning, the former at 
the close of his Galilean ministry. The rejection by the 
Samaritans is now caused by their prejudices. Christ's 
face now toward Jerus. He was therefore regarded as 
favoring the Jews. 

3. Again it is said Lk. 9 : 52 represents Christ's last 
journey to be through Samaria. But Mt. and Mk. make 
it through Perea. Andrews (p. 361) answers this by the 
reasonable supposition that he started to go through 
Samaria, but after his rejection changed his plan and 
went through Perea. 

§83. Feast of Tabernacles. This was one of the great 
annual feasts of the Jews, (Lev. 23 : 34) to commemorate 



119 



the Divine goodness in the Wilderness, and also to show 
gratitude for the rich fruits of the season. It was the 
most joyous of all the Jewish festivals, — so joyous that 
Plutarch mistook its character and called it a festival in 
honor of Bacchus. 

There was a division of sentiment concerning Christ 
among those at Jerus. Some said, ' b He is a good man : 
others said, Nay but he deceiveth the people " (John 7 : 
12.) Another expression of John is noticeable : " How- 
beit no man spake openly of him for fear of the Jews." 
This refers to the Jews who opposed Christ. The people 
did not know which side to take, because it was uncer- 
tain what the Sanhedrim would do. 

Historic Points : 1. Christ takes up his discourse with 
the Pharisees where he had left off (John 7 : 23) eighteen 
months before. The miracle to which he refers in v. 21, 
is the healing of the impotent man at Bethesda, which 
was followed by the charge of Sabbath-breaking. He 
here openly charges them with their purpose to kill him. 

2. The emphatic statements in verses 28-31 of his Divin- 
ity. This gave great offense to some, but no man laid 
hands on him, and many believed in him, asking " When 
Christ cometh will he do more miracles than these which 
this man hath done ?" 

3. The official act of the Sanhedrim to arrest him, be- 
cause of his influence over the people. All this on the 
first day. Now we come to the second day — " that great 
day of the feast" which was the last. Jesus stood and 
cried : " If any man thirst, let him come unto me and 
drink." The water which suggested this invitation is sup- 
posed to have been that which was taken from the pool of 
Siloam on each of the seven days and poured upon the 
ground in commemoration of the miraculous provision 
of water in the Wilderness. In it Christ saw a type of 
that Spirit which the world was to receive through him. 
The officers report to the Sanhedrim that they were una- 
ble to arrest him. The reason they give is remarkable : 
" Never man spake like this man" — showing the strong 
impression Christ's personal bearing had made upon 
them. The answer is received with ridicule : " Are ye 
also deceived ?" 



120 

Except for the remonstrance of Nieodemus (v. 51), the 
Sanhedrim would have condemned Christ, immediately. 
To him they sneeringly replied : " Art thou also of Galilee ? 
Search and look, for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet." 
But in the last statement they were mistaken. 

§84. Woman taken in Adultery. Most critics reject the 
first eleven verses of the 8th of John. The external and 
grammatical evidence against it is very strong. Tregelles 
claims that it is not original with John, but is an ancient 
extra-canonical record of an actual fact. The passage is 
not in the Sinaitic, Peshito, A., B., or C, uncial MSS. 
It is found only in the Vatican MS. and some of the 
early Fathers. But it seems to accord too well with the 
character of Christ, to be an invention. 

§85. Discourses in the Temjile. The effect of striking out 
John 8 : 2-11 would be to bring all these discourses on 
the last day of the feast. But it is more natural to con- 
sider the references in John 7 : 37 and 8 : 14 to relate to 
two different clays. If this be correct, there are two 
prominent periods of teaching: (1) 8:12-21; (2) 8:21- 
59. 

In the first, Christ proclaims himself the Light of the 
world. The Pharisees object to his bearing witness of 
himself, and say his record is not true. Our Lord proves 
its truth, a. by saying that the Father bears testimony of 
him; and b. by declaring his oneness with the Father. 

In the second, he discourses of his origin, of his going 
away, and of their dying in their sins. He charges them 
with the design of killing him, and alludes to the man- 
ner of his death in verse 28th : " When ye have lifted 
up the son of man." 

The pre-existenee of Christ is asserted by him in ex- 
press terms. The Jews regard the declaration as blas- 
phemy and give way to rage. They tear up the stones 
from the Temple pavement to put him to death as a blas- 
phemer. But Jesus hid himself, and so got out of their 
w T ay. 

§90. Healing of a man blind from birth, on the Sabbath. 
Robinson postpones this till just before the Dedication. 
But the prevailing opinion is that it comes in immediately 
after stoning referred to in John 8 : 59. In proof of 
Messiahship, Jesus opens eyes of blind man. The Phari- 



121 

sees after conversing with the latter, are enraged because 
he adheres to Jesus, and cast him out of the Synagogue. 
(Farrar, chap. 41, Vol. II.) The effect of this miraclewas 
to produce a division among the people. Many of them 
claimed that he had a devil. Others, that a devil could 
not open the eyes of the blind. (John 10: 19-21.) 

§89. The Seventy sent out. Tiseh, places this section in 
the interval between Dedication and Tabernacles ; 
Wies. while Jesus is on the way to Tabernacles. Place : 
Majority say Perea, some Gal. Best, Perea, Judea 
and Samaria. The design has a clear reference to 
Christ's coming once more to offer himself as the Mes- 
siah. Meyer: This whole journey intended to present 
to the people opportunity for final decision. Andrews : 
Their mission was not only to preach the kingdom, but 
to proclaim the King. In addition, probably a desire to 
accustom the disciples to their work, and familiarize 
the people with them as witnesses of the truth. Some 
say that the second order of church officers, viz.; Pres- 
byters, is here established. Wies.: The Seventy repre- 
sent the calling of the Gentiles. Their mission was the 
counterpart of that of the Twelve. The latter chosen in 
reference to the twelve tribes ; the seventy with reference 
to the seventy nations of the Gentiles for which prayers 
were offered, or the number may have reference to the 
seventy- elders of Israel, or to the Sanhedrim. But the 
leading idea seems to be a visitation of the whole country. 
(Vide Ebrard, pp. 322-3 ; Andrews, pp. 352-355 ; Farrar, 
Vol. II., eh. 42. Also comp. Gen. 10 and Gen. 46 : 27 
with Deut. 32 : 8.) # 

Objections : I. Silence of the other Evangelists, Lk. 
being the only one that mentions the Seventy. Ans : a. 
The objection would be valid if the Seventy had been 
set up as a permanent order in the church. Other 
Evangelists silent concerning a great portion of this 
period, but say nothing contrary to Lk's account. 

II. Instructions to Seventy and Twelve so similar that 
the Evangelists give different accounts of same occur- 
rence. Ans : a. The instructions were similar because 
the duties were similar, b. But there is an important 
difference in the fact that a permanent commission was 
given to the Twelve but not to the Seventy. Ebrard : 



122 

Address to Twelve has the character of induction into a 
permanent office, whereas that to Seventy has reference 
to a single task. 

III. Symbolical use of number Seventy is proof of a 
later date, and of artifice. Ans : Some number of mes- 
sengers must have been chosen, and whatever it might 
be the Sceptics would be sure to find fault with it. 

§89. The Seventy return. Difficult to assign this section 
with any certainty. The Seventy probably returned, 
two by two, bringing a glorious report (Lk. 10: 17-21.) 

§86. The Good Samaritan. Lk. 10: 25-37. In the 
parable Christ teaches that God may make distinctions 
among men, but men may not. All men are our neigh- 
bors. Hence, we must do good to all men. 

Second. Group of Parables : There are seventeen in all, 
closely connected and illustrating personal duties — four- 
teen of them peculiar to Lk. Three things worthy of 
notice: 1. Their appropriateness to the plan of Luke's 
gospel. They set forth God's mercy to sinners, and the 
duties consequent therefrom. Mt.'s group of seven all 
addressed to the people and the Disciples ; Lk.'s intend- 
ed for publicans and sinners. Mt.'s relate to the king- 
dom of God; Lk.'s point out the way of salvation. 2. 
Their appropriateness to the period of Christ's life, in 
which he finally offered himself to the nation. 3. They 
are directed against prominent errors of the Pharisees. 

Classification of these Parables. They may be reduced 
to a four-fold division : 

I. Those showing the love of God in Christ as the 
source of all blessing, a. To the poor and lowly — para- 
ble of Marriage Supper, b. As preventing grace — Lost 
Sheep, Lost Piece of Money, Prodigal Son. 

II. Those showing the means of obtaining God's 
mercy, and the resulting duties. a. Importunity in 
prayer— Friend at Midnight, Importunate Widow, b. 
liepentance and humility — parable of Pharisee and 
Publican, c. Watchful preparation — the Waiting Ser- 
vants (Lk. 12 : 27.) d. Counting the cost — Building a 
Tower, e. Universal love to our neighbor — the Good 
Samaritan. /. Using this world's goods without abusing 
them — Unjust Steward. 



123 

III. Those showing the judgments which follow neglect 
or abuse of God's mercy, a. Abuse of God's grace — 
Barren Fig-tree. b. Abuse of God's providence — Rich 
Man that built Larger Barns, c. Abuse of Wealth — 
Dives and Lazarus, d. Danger of partial moral refor- 
mation. Leads to worse state than the first — Return of 
Unclean Spirit. (Lk. 11 : 24.) 

IV. Those showing that rewards and punishments are 
to be proportioned to fidelity of stewardship — Parable 
of Ten Talents — Mustard Seed — Leaven. 

Sections 48, 49 and 51 are parallel with Mt. 12, and 
for this reason Robinson treats them together. Vide 
small syllabus, p. 12. 

§91. Feast of Dedication. Previous to this feast, (John 
10: 22.) Jesus had retired to Bethany in Perea. Why 
return to Jems. ? Not merely to keep the Feast, since 
the whole land kept it, but to confront the Pharisees. 
Not a feast of the Law, but instituted by Judas Macca- 
baeus, 164 B. C, in honor of the cleansing of the Tem- 
ple, and the rebuilding of the Altar, after the Expulsion 
of the Syrians. Season: The only feast in the winter- 
time, which, according to Wieseler, fell this year on 
Dec. 20. (Vide Farrar, chap. 45.) Christ was walking 
in this place because it was winter, the porch being part 
of the original temple which escaped destruction by 
Nebuchadnezzar. 

Scene interesting because it discloses the struggle in 
the minds of the Pharisees. " How long dost thou make 
us to doubt? If thou be the Christ tell us plainly." 
(John 10 : 24.) Request not unreasonable for Christ had 
all along claimed the office, and declaimed the title. 
Two views in regard to the spirit of the question : 

I. That it was insidious and dishonest, intended to 
draw out a definite claim of Messiahship so that they 
could have something definite on which to base their 
charges. 

II. That it was honest and fair. Christ had never told 
them positively that he was the Messiah, and now when 
challenged he still does not answer directly, because of 
their misconceptions. According to their understanding 
of the term he was not the Messiah. But he affirms his 
Messiahship to them in three ways: 1. He had told 



124 

them before, and they did not believe him. 2. By refer- 
ring to the works he had wrought. 3. His gift to his 
sheep is eternal life, and he is the Son of God, one with 
the^Father. This enraged the Jews and they took up 
stones to stone him. " But," says Farrar, " his undis- 
turbed majesty disarmed them with a word." " Many 
good deeds did I show you from my Father ; for which 
ofthesedoyou mean to stone me?" He then quoted 
the 82nd Psalm, where judges are called gods. But he 
executes a higher office. This seems to ascribe his Son- 
ship not to his nature, but to his being sent by the Father. 

Ans.: 1. The terms used imply his pre-existence. 2. 
Even if he does here advance only the lowest claim to 
the title, " Son of God," it is no proof that he does not 
elsewhere use it in highest sense. No one besides 
Christ ever says, " I and my Father are one." 

Then they attempt to seize him, but Farrar says " they 
could not. His presence overawed them. They could 
only make a passage for him, and glare their hatred upon 
him as he passed from among them." 

Because of the opposition Christ goes to Bethany in 
Perea, where John had been baptizing. The latter is 
mentioned because a witness for Christ. How long he 
staid there is not known, but St. John tells us that many 
resorted to him and believed on him, being convinced of 
the truth of John Bap.'s testimony. (John 10: 41-42.) 
(The sections from 95 to 101 were passed over.) 

§§92, 93. Raising of Lazarus. Counsel of Oaiaphas. A 
message comes to Christ in Perea from the sisters of 
Lazarus, stating that their brother is sick. After two 
days Christ came to Bethany and found that Lazarus had 
been buried four da} 7 s (John 11.) 

Theories explaining the time : a. Lazarus died on the 
day when the message was sent. Christ delayed two 
days, and then went to Bethany occupying one day with 
the journey. 

b. Christ received the message that Lazarus was sick, 
waited two days for his death, and occupied four days 
with the journey. Farrar takes the former view, mainly 
on the ground that Bethany in Perea, where Christ was, 
is only about 20 miles from the Bethany near Jerus., 
where Lazarus lived. He also infers that the family of 



125 

Lazarus was one of wealth and position from its proximity 
to Jerus. and from the concourse of Jews who had come 
to sympathize with the bereaved sisters. (Farrar, chap. 
47.) 

Opposition among the Jews : This is again referred to in 
the remonstrance of the Disciples against Christ's going 
up to Jerus. lest he should be killed. Thomas says : 
" Let us also go that we may die with him." (John 11 : 
16.) Christ goes up voluntarily to sacrifice himself. 

Design of the Miracle : To understand it aright, recall 
design of period — to give the people final opportunity of 
accepting him as Messiah. On the other hand, the peo- 
ple hesitated to come to a decision because the action of 
the rulers was uncertain. Christ's object was to secure a 
decision of the people, for or against him. Hence the 
prayer at the grave of Lazarus, — u because of the people 
which stood by." (John 11 : 42.) This culminating event 
is, therefore, reserved until near the close of Christ's 
ministry, and for the neighborhood of Jerusalem. The 
proof that the Father had sent him is thus given in the 
presence of the rulers. Still, there is a contrast between 
the openness of his private teaching, e. g., to Martha 
when he says, " I am the resurrection and the life," and 
his public teaching when he says, " that they may believe 
that thou has sent me." 

Effect of the Miracle : Very profound. Many be- 
lieved, and others ran with excitement to tell the rulers. 
(John 11 : 45-46.) This was the last link in the chain of 
events which led to the malicious decision of the Sanhe- 
drim. Farrar: " They could not deny the miracle; they 
would not believe on him who had performed it ; they 
could only dread his growing influence, and conjecture 
that it would be used to make himself a king, and so 
end in Roman intervention and the annihilation of their 
political existence." 

Why should the people's faith in Christ produce such 
a result ? Two ans : 1. Some say this was a mere pre- 
tense by the Pharisees. 2. True view is that Pharisees 
recognized real result of Christ's claims. If the spiritual 
view of Christ's kingdom were now to prevail with the 
people all hope of political deliverance and independence 
would be lost, as well as their present sources of liveli- 



126 

hood. Being engaged in a bitter struggle for national 
independence, they were convinced by the address of the 
High Priest that it was better for one man to perish 
rather than that the whole nation should perish (John 
11 : 50-51.) They would not even stop to inquire whether 
this one person were innocent or guilty, says Farrar. 
Still, though selfish and Pharisaic, their reasons contained 
elements of power. " Then from that day forth they took 
counsel together for to put him to death," although this 
was not the first time the Pharisees, as a party, had so 
determined. Vide John 5 : 16-18. At Tabernacles 
Jesus accused them of this design. John 7: 19. 

Advice of Caiaphas : John remarks that the words of 
Caiaphas were not his own, but a prophecy of the 
Atonement, he " being the High Priest that same year." 
(Vide suggestive note by Farrar on the expression "that 
same year." Vol. II., p. 174.) Common view is that 
the prophecy was involuntary on part of Caiaphas. But 
what he meant in a low sense, God meant in a, high 
sense. 

Objections to the Miracle : Sceptics flourish here. Spin- 
oza says if he conlcl have believed that miracle he would 
have become a Christian and broken in pieces his own 
philosophical system. 

1. It is said the Disciples misunderstood Jesus when 
he said, " Our friend Lazarus sleepeth," and that Martha 
misunderstood him when he said, " Thy brother shall 
rise again," which would not have been the case if he 
had been in the habit of working miracles. 

2. It is alleged that the Jews would not have referred 
to an inferior miracle — opening the eyes of the blind — if 
Christ had power to raise the dead. 

Ai:s : The Jews refer to the blind man's case, because 
it was of recent occurrence, and had made a deep im- 
pression. The other cases of resurrection had taken 
place in Gal., and could have been known to the Jews 
near Jerus., only by report, 

3. It is alleged that we cannot consistently believe 
that Christ would wait two days after receiving the mes- 
sage that Lazarus was sick. If Lazarus was not dead, it 
was cruel in him to tarry ; if he was dead, it was mere 
ostentation to dela}'. 



127 

Ans : If there was any delay, which some deny, its 
object was to exercise the faith of the sisters and the Dis- 
ciples. Besides, it is possible that he had an important 
work to finish in Perea. 

4. The prayer at the grave is objected to. It is said to 
be out of analogy with his other miracles. Strauss does 
not hesitate to call it a " sham prayer," offered for the 
sake of appearance, in reference to those that stood by. 

Ans : Christ did not not pray on other occasions, be- 
cause he desired to give evidence of his own power and 
divinity. Here he prays to show his relation to the 
Father, appealing to God in the sight of the Jews. 

5. Another objection is found in the silence of the 
Synoptists concerning a family made so prominent by 

John. Luke mentions Martha and Mary, but neither 
Lazarus nor Bethany. 

6. The Synoptists silent about the miracle, which was 
the most important of all. 

Answer : a, Lazarus and his family were specially 
obnoxious to the Jews because of their intimacy with 
Jesus, and especially because Lazarus was a living wit- 
ness of his power to raise the dead. Hence there is a 
convincing argument in the fact that the Syn., writing 
first, forbore to make this family prominent lest they 
should suffer persecution. This obstacle, however, no 
longer existed when John wrote. But it may be added 
danger to themselves seems never to have influenced the 
Evangelists to hide any of the facts of Christ's life. 

b. But a better answer is found in the settled plan of 
the Sjm. not to relate any events occurring at Jerus. until 
the closing week of Christ's life. They confine them- 
selves mainly to Gal. Min. Each tells the things most 
directly within his own scope. Hence, Farrar : " Now 
since raising of Lazarus was no greater evidence, to them, 
of miraculous power than those which they recorded, 
and since it fell within the Judean cycle, the omission of 
the miracle is no more inexplicable than the omission of 
the miracle of Bethesda (John 5,) or the healing of the 
man born blind, (John 9.") Farrar, chap. 47. 

It is further objected that we cannot accept the Syn.'s 
account of the sudden burst of applause with which 
Jesus was received in Judea after the Gal. Min : Mt. 19: 



128 

1, 2. But notice that it is Feast-time when he reaches 
Jerus., and multitudes from Gal. are already there. 

Naturalistic Theory of the Miracle: 1. Not actual natu- 
ral death. Only a case of trance. " He is not dead but 
sleepeth " is to be taken literally. Renan claims there 
was actual collusion between Christ and the sisters. 2. 
The miracle grows out of a misunderstanding of the con- 
versation with Martha about the resurrection. 

Mythical Theory : Strauss held this theory at first, but 
he at last adopted the Tubingen view mainly. He says 
raising of Lazarus is a fiction based on one of Luke's 
parables. Baur and others say it is a creation of the 2nd 
century, and its germ was the expression, " I am the 
resurrection." But all these theories illustrate the 
credulity of unbelief, since any one of these views is 
harder to support than the plain Gospel narrative. (Vide 
Ebrard, pp. 351-358.) 

Christ retires to Ephraim. On account of the action of 
the Sanhedrim, (John 11 : 47-54) Christ retires to the 
city of Ephraim, to delay the execution of the decree 
until his time should come. Where is Ephraim ? Some 
say east of the Jordan. More likely near Jerusalem. 
Some identify it with the Ephraim in 2 Chron. 13 : 19, 
near to Bethel, or twenty miles north of Jerusalem. 
Josephus speaks of a cavalry expedition of Vespasian 
by way of Ephraim to Bethel. (Vide Robinson's Greek 
liar. pp. 203-4; Farrar, Vol. II., p. 176.) Intervening 
sections not touched npou. Vide small syllabus, p. 14. 

§107. Third Prediction of Christ's Death. This predic- 
tion more specific than in 74th or 77th section. Judicial 
death now predicted, to be accomplished by the help of 
the Gentiles, (Mt. 20 ; Mk. 10 ; Lk. 18.) He foretells 
the manner of his death, viz., b}r crucifixion, and .predicts 
that he shall rise on the third day. He tells this to the 
Twelve alone. Mark notes the fear of the Disciples, 
chap. 10 : 32, from which it may be inferred there was 
something supernatural in Christ's appearance. 

PASSION WEEK 

Natural Divisions : 1. From the arrival in Bethany to 
the Passover Supper — six days. 2. From the Supper to 
the Crucifixion. 3. From the Resurrection to the Ascen- 



129 

sion. Recorded in Mt. 21-28 chaps.; Mk. 11-16; Lk. 
19-24; John 12-21. Space given by each Evangelist; 
Mt. little more than one-third ; Mk. little less than one- 
third ; Luke one-fourth ; John nearly one half. In many 
cases three, in some four, parallel accounts. 

Characteristics of the Period: I. A period of voluntary 
sacrifice. Christ's hour is now at hand, and he submits 
voluntarily to be condemned and executed by his ene- 
mies. Seeks the most public places. Takes possession 
of the Temple, and for three days holds his foes at bay. 
All their former plots to take him had failed. But now, 
by an event, accidental on their part, but designed on 
his, they are enabled to seize him, and he without resist- 
ance gives himself up to them. His death, therefore, 
voluntary, and hence sacrificial — a sacrifice for sin. ^o 
other theory can explain the facts. 

II. It is a period in which Christ prominently asserts 
his claims to the title of Messiah. This he does in three 
ways: a. Typically by securing the Hosannas of the 
multitude as he enters Jerus. b. Publicly during his 
trial, c. By his teaching. 

III. The Teaching is supplemental and appropriate to 
the period. In all Christ's teaching there is a marked 
advance. W T e have here three kinds of teaching : a. 
The last of the three groups of Parables : 1. Concern- 
ing " Kingdom of Heaven ;" 2. The way of salvation ; 
8. The Judgment, b. Final discourses against Phari- 
sees, c. Consolatory instruction to Disciples. In Mt. 
these instructions largely prophetic ; in John both pro- 
phetic and consolatory. Explains to them that he must 
go away in order that the Comforter may come. 

Order of Events. The Evangelists governed by same 
plan. The order is alike in all four except in two instan- 
ces : a. John makes the Supper at Bethany the first 
event of the week, while Sj'n. place it on the eve of the 
third day. b. They differ as to the time of cursing the 
barren fig-tree. In their plan, Mt. refers to prophecy, 
Mk. to details, by days, and Lk. is supplementary. Rul- 
inor idea is contrast between Christ's personal dignity and 
gentleness and his cruel treatment by the priests, rulers 
and people. 

Succession of days. This is obtainedfrom Mk. by count- 
ing back from the Passover Supper five days ; and also 



130 

from John 12 : 1. " Then Jesus six days before the Pass- 
over came to Bethany." John's peculiar idiom means, 
literal iy, six days. Notice we have in John a week both 
at the beginning and end of Christ's ministry. Mode of 
counting days involves two questions : a. Shall we count 
in both extremes? b. Was 14th Nisau, Thursday or 
Friday? Did the Supper come on the day of the feast, 
or on the evening before? The day of Crucifixion, we 
have seen in the opening lectures on Chronology, was 
Friday, 15th Nisan. The Supper was the regular Paschal 
meal eaten on Thursday the 14th. 

Theories: 1. Wies., Lich., Andrews count back six 
days from Thursday the 14th, excluding the latter, which 
brings us to Friday, the 8th as the day of arrival in 
Bethany. 2. Lange includes Thursday which gives the 
9th, or the Jewish Sabbath as the day of Christ's arrival. 
Lange supposes that Christ halted on Friday a Sabbath- 
day's journey from Jerus. 3. Those who follow Bleek's 
arrangement, as Tisch., Ell., A 1 ford and Schaff, make 
Friday the 14th Nisan. But as they count backward six 
days excluding Friday the days of the week remain un- 
altered. 4. Robinson holds Friday to have been the first 
day of the feast. Six days before would make the arrival 
in Bethany on Sunday, and he supposes the Jewish Sab- 
bath to have been spent in Jericho. 

Objections to Robinson : a. He begins a day later 
than any other Harmonist and compresses the 4th and 
5th days into one. (Mk. 14: 1.) b. The feast did not 
begin on the 15th. (Levit. 23 : 5.) e. It is contrary to 
tradition which makes Palm Sunday the commemorative 
day of Christ's entrance into Jerus. Robinson makes 
the entrance on Monday, d. His own earlier editions 
take the other view. Farrar : " Thither (the loved home 
at Bethany) he arrived on the evening of Friday, Nisan 
8, A. U. C. 780 (March 31, A. D. 30,) six days before the 
Passover, and before the sunset had commenced the Sab- 
bath hours." Vol. II. p. 188. Vide Andrews, pp. 396- 
7-8. 

§§111, 131. Supper at Bethany. John places this on the 
evening before the public entrance into Jerus. The 
Synoptists place it on the eve of Tuesday, or two days 



131 

before the Passover (Mt. 26 : 2.) This difference alleged 
to be irreconcilable. 

Ans : Neither John nor the Syn. date the Supper 
positively. The six days of John do not date the Supper 
but the arrival in Bethany; and the two days of Mt. and 
Mk. do not date the Supper but the betrayal of Judas. 
Farrar: " It is only in appearance that the Syn. seem 
to place this feast two days before the Passover. They 
narrate it there to account for the treacheiw of Judas, 
which was consummated by his final arrangements with 
the Sanhedrim on the Wednesday of Holy week; but we 
see from St. John that this latter must have been his 
second interview with them — at the first interview all 
details had been left indefinite." (Farrar, Yol. II., p. 
188, Note.) 

Robinson follows order of Syn. These are his rea- 
sons : 1. The offence taken by Judas at this feast was 
the occasion of his treason. Rulers had resolved to delay 
arrest. But Judas' proposal on Tuesday, (Supper on 
Tuesday eve.) gave them an unexpected opportunity. 
Ans : It does not appear that Judas went immediately to 
the priests. 

2. The tots of Mt. — " then Judas] went out.'' Ans : 
But tuts is not always used by Mt. in reference to time. 
He often makes it connect passages which are not suc- 
cessive. 

3. John transposes events in order to complete account 
of occurrences at Bethany. 

Arguments in favor of John 's order : 1. John more com- 
plete. 2. Trj ino.'jiuov (John 12 : 12) — " the next day " — 
was the day of public entrance. Best exegesis favors 
John's order. 3. Whole passage in Mt. and Mk. 
seems to be parenthetical. Balance of probability in 
favor of John's order. According to latter Christ arrived 
in Bethany on Friday. His friends make him a feast, 
as had been done when he left Capernaum and Perea. 
He did not decline this mode of being honored. Sisters 
of Lazarus improve the occasion to display their grati- 
tude, and Jesus makes reference to his approaching death. 

Popular Excitement. In John 11 : 55-57, we read that 
many went from the country to Jerus. to the Passover. 
The great theme of conversation among the rulers was 



132 

Christ. " What think ye, that he will not come to the 
feast?" They expected negative answer. He had not 
come to previous feast. From John 11 : 57 we learn that 
the Sanhedrim had made public charges against Christ, 
and were waiting to take him. But their doubts are 
soon solved by the public arrival of Jesus, which in- 
creased the excitement. Multitudes flocked out of the 
city to meet him. 

Place of the Supper : It is urged that it must have been 
in the house of Martha and Mary because they were 
present and ; ' Martha served," which is supposed to con- 
tradict Mt. and Mk. who say it was in the house of Simon 
the leper. But, as Ebrard suggests, why could not 
Martha insist upon " serving " in the house of the host 
with whom her family were intimate ? Some say that 
Simon was the father of Lazarus ; others that he was the 
husband of Martha. Or he may have been the owner 
of the house in which Martha and Mary lived. 

Mode of Anointing : John says the feet ; Mt. and Mk. 
the head. Ebrard, in reply to objectors, inquires, Why 
not both? Then according to John, it was Judas who 
objected to the waste ; according to Mt, it was " his dis- 
ciples." Ans: Where is it denied by John that none of 
the disciples but Judas objected ? John mentions Judas 
in order to give the motive for his objection. 

Another objection is founded upon the resemblance 
between this anointing and the one in Lk. 7 : 36. 
Lightfoot : Three anointings: one in John, one in 
Mt. and Mk., and one in Lk. He denies any 
contradiction. Strauss claims that the whole record 
has to do with only one case of anointing. Ebrard an- 
swers Strauss by saying that the only resemblance be- 
tween present anointing and that in Lk. 7 : 36 is that the 
name in both cases is Simon and the feet of Jesus are 
wiped with the hair. But one Simon was a Pharisee, the 
other a quiet follower of Jesus. Ebrard also suggests that 
there was quite probably more than one Simon in Pales- 
tine, and that it was not impossible that the circumstance 
of wiping the feet should be repeated. (Ebrard, pp. 
366-369.) 

Lessons taught. 1. The offering was valuable in itself — 
" very precious." This may apply both to the box and 



133 

the contents. 2. The quantity was large — worth about 
fifty dollars. Farrar from this infers that the family was 
rich. Juclas is indignant at the waste, but Jesus defends 
Mary's act, and declares that it shall be a memorial of 
her throughout the world. The inference is that the 
expression of a lofty religious sentiment justifies great 
expenditure, provided it is subordinate to deeds of charity 
to our neighbor. 

Other suggestions: a. Character of the sisters always 
the same. Martha "serves;" Mary sits at Jesus' feet. 
b. Meaning of" this Gospel." Meyer says the reference 
is to his death of which he had first spoken. The wide 
preaching of the Gospel is also referred to. Alford says 
it is the prediction of a future written Gospel. Notice 
how literally the prediction concerning Mary has been 
fulfilled. The rebuke stimulated the malice of Judas 
until he became a traitor. 

§112. Publie Entrance into Jerus. 1. Time: It was on 
Sunday, 10th Nisan. Bleek says Sunday, and Robin- 
son, Monday. That it was a day after a night in Beth- 
any appears from John 12 : 12. Meaning of the event : 
He rode upon a carpet of branches and garments. It 
was a public acknowledgment of his kingly claims as the 
Messiah. His hour had come. Hence the contrast with 
his previous conduct is very noticeable. Important that 
the people should be impressed as well as the Disciples. 
Appropriate that his last public act should be the clearest 
proof of his Messiahship. 

Significance of date. His entrance on the 10th of the 
month is directly associated with the Law in Exodus 12: 
3. It was the day when the Paschal lamb was set apart. 
So the Lamb of God sets his willing seal to his own con- 
secration as the sacrifice for sin. Symbolical acts: a. 
Riding on an ass's colt. This was fulfillment of the 
prophecy in Zech. 9:9. b. It was specially significant 
of his kingship. Xot on a war-horse, but on an ass sig- 
nificant of peace in Oriental countries. The animal, too, 
was a colt " whereon never man sat." Like the alabaster 
box im profaned by other use. c. Strewing branchesand 
garments also significant of royalty, d. The people also 
bore palm-branches in their hands, as emblems of victory. 

Sudden Enthusiasm of the People. This was occasioned 
by his acceptance of their homage. Always ready to 



134 

support him when the result seemed likely to be their 
restoration to temporal and political superiority. The 
multitudes quoted Ps. 118. This originally composed at 
the restoration of the Temple, and now applied to the 
Messiah by the people, showing that they regarded Je3us 
as one whom they had looked for. " Hosanna to the Son 
of David." Jesus had never before allowed the public 
ascription of Messiahship, because it would rouse opposi- 
tion before his work was completed. But now his work 
was done. The Pharisees, feeling scandalized, said unto 
him : " Master rebuke thy Disciples." Jesus answered 
that " if these should hold their peace, the stones would 
immediately cry out," i. e., to silence the people would 
be to suppress eternal truth. Robinson introduces the 
Hosannas of the children, the day after the feast at 
Bethany, in this place. But most Harmonists follow 
Mt's order, and introduce this after cursing of fig-tree. 
Prophecies fulfilled : Isa. 62 : 11 with Zech. 9 : 9 ; also 
Gen. 49: 10, 11. 

Lamentation over Jems. This scene is preserved by Lk. 
and connected directly with public entrance. While 
they are hailing him as king, he foresees the sad fate of 
the city. Judicial blindness had seized the rulers and 
the people. He sees that the majority will rebel against 
him and aid in putting him to death; that the enemies 
of the Jews will dig a trench about Jerus., and not 
leave one stone upon another. (Lk. 19: 43,44.) This 
prophecy was literally fulfilled, for the Roman army was 
encamped on the very spot where this prediction was 
uttered. 

The Pharisees were ready to give up in despair when 
they saw Christ's popularity. Effect on the people : The 
whole city was moved — kada&yj^i. e., shaken. Christ thus 
had an opportunity to finish his work, for his enemies 
no less than his friends were involved in the excitement. 
Road by which he entered: Mount of Olives not a single 
hill, but a ridge with three summits. Three roads cross 
it. The northern one is steep; the second is half way 
down the mountain ; and the third, which Christ prob- 
ably took, and " which sweeps round the southern 
shoulder of the central mass," is the main road for all 
kinds of travel. On this road there is a projecting mass 



135 

of rock around which the road suddenly turns to the 
north, and then the whole city bursts suddenly upon the 
vision. This angle has been fixed upon as the place 
where Jesus stood as he wept over the city. 

Location, of places : Bethany signifying House of 
Dates, is from 1J to 2 miles S. E. of Jems. Its modern 
name is Lazarieh, which thus continues to bear witness 
to the o^reat miracle wrought there. S"ow a small village 
of some twenty houses, occupied by Bedouin Arabs. 
Bethphage, House of Unripe Figs, according to Lightfoot 
was a suburb of Jerus., though hardly any two opinions 
agree. (Andrews, pp. 404-5.) 

Objections: 1. The Syn. introduce the narrative as 
though the last journey were continuous. John says 
that Jesus passed the night at Bethany, and the " next 
day " went to Jerus. Ans : John gives the natural order 
of events while the Syn. record simply the connection 
of events. Ebrard denies that it is any where stated that 
Jesus went to Jerus. the same day he left Jericho, as 
Strauss assumes in order to prove an alleged contradic- 
tion. 2. If Jesus started from Bethany as John says, 
then he could not have sent there for the animals. Ans : 
Who says he did send there for the animals ? The " vil- 
lage " referred to by Mt. and Mk. refers not to one of 
those named, but to another on the way to Jerus. And, 
as Ebrard suggests, why could he not send forward for 
the colt after he had gone some distance from Bethany? 
(Vide Ebrard, pp. 371-2 on the expression "drew nigh.") 

3. Mode of obtaining the animals supposes a mythical 
origin for the narrative. Ans : The objection is trifling. 
The method chosen is in fulfillment of prophecy. Some 
suppose the owner of the animals believed in the Lord; 
others, that a pre-arrangement had beeu made with him. 

4. It is said that Mt. (21 : 7) represents Jesus as riding 
on both animals. Ans : A similar expression is used in 
Acts 23 : 24. But nobody infers that Paul rode several 
animals at once. (Ebrard, p. 372.) Christ's entrance is 
alleged to have been an attempt to excite revolution. 
This is an old charge. It is refuted by the fact that after 
the triumphal entrance he immediately withdraws to 
Bethany, thereby, as some suppose, signifying that he 
left Jerus. to its fate. 



136 

§113. Cursing the Fig-tree ; Cleansing the Temple. Bleek 
puts these events on Sunday, 10th JSTisan ; Wies. on the 
11th and Rob. on the 12th. Difference between Mt. and 
Mk. very slight. Mt. puts the events in their natural 
connection, without noticing the division of time. Puts 
cleansing of Temple immediately after entrance, and 
cursing of Fig-tree next morning. (Mt. 21 : 17-18.) 
This tree often planted by the way-side for its shade and 
because " the dust was thought to facilitate its growth." 
Its fruit was common property. Being hungry he ap- 
proached this tree whose rich foliage promised fruit. 
Finding nothing but leaves, Jesus said, " Let no fruit 
grow on thee henceforward forever." 

Objections : 1. It is said if lie had known there were no 
ligs he would not have sought them. If he did not 
know then he is not omniscient. Ans. : The objection 
assumes that he was bound to tell all he knew. 2. Why 
did he expect fruit at tins season? Mk. says, " for the 
time of tigs was not yet." Ans.: a. "It was not the 
time of year, but the striking quantity of leaves for the time 
of year, which led to the expectation that there would 
certainly be tigs upon the tree," says Ebrard. b. Al- 
though not the general season for tigs as Mk. states, 
" there is to this day, in Palestine, a kind of white or 
early tig which ripens in spring, and much before the 
ordinary or black fig." Furthermore, the autumn tigs 
often remained on the trees through the winter, until 
the new spring leaves had come. (Farrar, Vol. II., pp. 
213-4.) 

3. It is charged that this act was not only the destruc- 
tion of a shade tree but also an expression of unworthy 
anger. Ans. : The lesson taught is of far more import- 
ance than the tree. Farrar asks, " Is it a crime under 
any circumstances to destroy a useless tree? If not, is it 
more a crime to do so by miracle ?" This is the only in- 
stance of a miracle of Judgment. The act was a sym- 
bolic one. The tree with its luxurious leaves was a type 
of the Jewish Church, outwardly flourishing, but inward- 
ly barren. It was therefore destroyed. The act is related 
on the one hand to the lamentation over Jerus., on the 
other, to the parable following, (Farrar Vol. II., pp. 215- 
16.) Ebrard says Strauss's conjecture that Christ was 



137 

moved only by anger at not finding any figs, " is too 
worthless and wicked to have sprang from anything 
but utter insanity." 

Cleansing the Temple. Symbolically, this act is the 
counterpart of the preceding. Christ here assumes pos- 
session of the Temple in anticipation of the future reign 
over the church, and his final success. It was also the 
manifestation of his Messiahship, as the Pharisees plainly 
understood. For they said, " By what authority doest 
thou these things ?" The whole Temple services were 
fulfilled in Christ, who is God with us. Temple was the 
place where God then met with his people. Now, in 
Christ God meets with them. In John 2 : 16, it is writ- 
ten " make not my Father's house a house of merchan- 
dise." In Mk. 11 : 17, " My house shall be called of all 
nations the house of prayer." These two passages gene- 
rally considered to form a climax. Emphasis in latter 
passage is on " all nations," making the final univer- 
sality of ChristiHnit} T prominent. The second point is 
the spiritual relation of the people of God. John 2: 13 
points to reformation ; Mk. 11 : 17 to judicial judgment. 
Jews must be driven out to make room for others. The 
rulers are again enraged and seek to destroy him, but 
fail in their purpose. This Monday was a day of great 
triumph, for, despite the Pharisees, he taught all day in 
the Temple and at night went out of the city. 

§114. Th». barren Fig-tree withers away. On the way to 
the city, in the morning, the Disciples saw that the fig- 
tree had withered away. '• The quick eye of Peter was 
the first to notice it." Instead of explaining its mean- 
ing, Jesus gives them a suggestive lesson on Faith, and 
the encouragement to prayer. 

§115. Authority of Christ questioned. Having arrived at 
the Temple Christ walked about and taught as if he had 
sole authority. The second step in events of the week 
is found in events of this day. Christ does not yield 
possession of the Temple to force. When he goes it is 
voluntarily. Here we meet with efforts of the priests to 
destroy his influence. It was necessary that his power 
should be thus tested, so that the subsequent surrender 
of himself should be clearly voluntary. The moral tri- 
umph of this day is the preface of his trial. Notice 1. 



138 

The assault of the Sanhedrim upon his authority. It is 
followed by three parables — the two sons, the wicked 
husbandmen, and the marriage of the kind's son. All 
set forth the judgment to come. 2, Crafty questions 
intended to involve him in difficulty with civil authori- 
ties, and break down his influence. Attempts by Phari- 
sees, Sadducees and lawyers. 3. Long judicial discourses 
against the Pharisees. 4. The prophetic discourses con- 
cerning destruction of Jerusalem and the final judgment 
pronounced upon his departure from the temple. (Mt. 
25.) This discourse is the last of his public teaching, 
except the one on occasion of the visit of the Greeks. 
Jno. 12 : 20-50. This day has been called the great 
prophetic day. Disproportionate length of narrative 
accounted for by fact that it is the day of final teaching. 
Result of the consultation of the Sanhedrim : They 
question him concerning his authority. It was official ; 
put to him as soon as he reached the temple, and involved 
1. The fact that the rulers were divinely appointed, and 
that Christ was acting in opposition to them. 2. Showed 
an appreciation of his true Messianic claims. Hence it 
was a well chosen question, for the people were unwilling 
for any other than a temporal Messiah. The Pharisees had 
thought to receive the answer, " I am the Christ." But 
if question was subtle, the answer shows Divine wisdom. 
" The baptism of John, was it from heaven or of men ?" 
Alleged that this answer, like their question, a trap, and 
unworthy of Christ. But it is no evasion ; for 1. The 
Pharisees put the issue between them on the ground of 
authority. 2. If John had divine authority then his 
record of Jesus was a sufficient answer to their question. 
The answ r er is at same time an exposure of the hypo- 
critical pretence of the rulers of their zeal for authority. 
They are obliged to confess their ignorance. Three 
parables concerning judgment follow closely on this 
defeat. Lesson taught by them "all is : rejection of Christ 
by the nation transferred its privileges and blessings to 
the Gentiles. Association of the three kept up in the 
figure. Parable of two sons. Makes his enemies judge 
themselves. He sets forth their sins, hypocrisy, unbelief, 
and disobedience. Primary application was either to 
Jews and Gentiles, or to Pharisees and Publicans. Same 
principles involved. 



139 

§116. The Wicked Husbandmen. The disobedience was 
national, and not negative but active persecution and 
consequent judgment. The figure of vineyard is sus- 
tained — there conduct was personal, here national. Sin 
was not only in refusing the Lord his vineyard, but in 
killing his son. The vineyard was therefore taken from 
them and given to the Gentiles. Shows the love of God 
to his church ; the exaltation of Christ, Ps. 118. *' The 
stone which the builders rejected is become the head of 
the corner." By striking transition Christ depicts a 
negative judgment. "Whosoever shall fall, &c.," and then 
a positive judgment "on whomsoever it shall fall, &c." 
The verb here means to winnow, but in our version figure 
of stone is retained and is probably correct. Personal 
application of parable to Pharisees is made in Mt. 21 : 
43, and results in an attempt by them to assault him. 

§117. Marriage of the King's Son. Figure retained ; suc- 
cessive missions, ill-treatment and refusal. The previous 
parables dwelt on failure of duty, this teaches forfeiture 
of privileges only alluded to at close of last. The grace 
of God more prominent in this. Main reference is to the 
calling of the Gentiles. Should be carefully studied with, 
and distinguished from, parable of the Great Supper in 
Lk. 14. Point of view different in Mt. Calling of Gen- 
tiles here checking of Pharisaic pride. Climactic relation 
of two. Mt. closes with entrance of man without wed- 
ding garment. Showing that personal, not national 
qualifications are required. Publicans and harlots might 
otherwise be led to think they were heirs of the king- 
dom. Baptism, Charity, Faith, Christian life — a new 
heart indispensable. Element of mercy in all this sever- 
ity of Christ — warning men of clanger common to all and 
into which the Jews had especially fallen. 

§118. Question of Pharisees concerning Tribute. The Phari- 
sees thus baffled retire and take counsel. Renew T attack, 
intending this time to embroil Christ with Pilate — send 
spies, literally perjurers with instructions to be respect- 
ful in manner. Dilemma — he must offend either people 
or the government. They expected a negative answer 
which would justify a charge of rebellion. Lk. 5: 20. 
Notice hypocrisy of rulers — this decision expected of 
them by Christ as basis of a charge, was to them a mat- 



140 

ter of conscience — independence being a part of their 
religion. Question also touched point of contrast be- 
tween his and their doctrine of the Messianic kingdom. 
These two questions involved whole case of Pharisees — 
containing the two charges against him at his trial of 
blasphemy and sedition- they wanted him to a\ow his 
Divinity and also to oppose the Government ; the second, 
a natural sequel of first, if you have such authority, how 
reconcile it with Csesar's. But he replies by calling for 
coin — the coinage of money is prerogative of the ruler 
in all countries. He recognizes distinction between two 
spheres of duty and that they are not inconsistent. Pre- 
cise relation not here stated. His answer surprises 
questioners, silences them, yet without offence. 

§119. Question of the Sadducees. Probably they came at 
the instigation of Sanhedrim. Reply to previous ques- 
tion was on their side and they try now to evoke a reply 
against the Pharisees. This question differs in spirit 
from previous one which tho' hypocritical was serious 
and important — this frivolous. Sadducees at first denied 
tradition simply; then certain portions of'SS., and finally 
denied the resurrection and future punishment — because 
of their sceptical views. Their question, based on Deut. 
25 : 5 which as law now obsolete on account of loss of 
land boundaries, was not a real one. Impossible case 
of woman married to seven brothers. Treats question 
as unworthy of notice, proves resurrection from Ex. 8 : 6, 
"I am the God of thy father &c." He is not God of 
dead but of living. No marriage relation after resurrec- 
tion. 

Strauss charges Christ with rabbinical finesse. 1. The 
words in Ex. simply meant continuance of covenant rela- 
tions with Abraham's posterity. 2. Admitting words 
refer to future state, they prove not resurrection but 
immortality of the soul. Hence proof is irrelevant. 
Ans. to first objection, a. Christ, some say, not arguing, 
but simply stating the meaning of passage, b. More 
commonly held that he does argue. The relation between 
God and the Patriarchs was a covenant relation and 
therefore an enduring relation of force in both worlds. 
Ans. to second objection. It is a complete answer to Sad- 
ducees, because their denial of resurrection was based 



141 

upon denial of immortality of soul and greater includes 
the less. Effect on multitude great, scribes even exclaim, 
" Master, well said." Parties divided. Comp. with Acts 
20. 

§120. Lawyer's question as to greatest commandment. Nat- 
urally follows previous one, which had to do with the 
law. The dilemma ? Two views. 1. The question was 
much discussed among various parties of the Jews, and 
any commandment specified by Christ would offend the 
advocates of all the others. Stier quotes from one of the 
Rabbins, that Moses enjoined 365 prohibitions and 248 
commands — in all 618. 

2. A profound explanation is that attributed by Schaff 
and Lange, (really as old as Chrysostom). The tempta- 
tion lay in the opportunity given our Lord to assert his 
own Divinity. They expected him to fix on the unity of 
God as the most important 0. T. truth, and the command 
to love him, the greatest. Had he done so he would have 
given them an opening by which to lead him to assert 
his equality with God. That this is true view appears 
from Christ's counter question, "How could David call 
him Lord who is his Son." Christ's answer asserts the 
unity of the law as opposed to the divisions of the Jews, 
and the true principle of obedience as love to God, 
whence flows love to man. The lawyer is struck with 
conviction — " Master thou hast well said." 

§121. Christ's question to the Pharisees. u How does 
David call him Lord ?" This is not as some assert a mere 
evasion. It is really the climax of the whole disputation. 
To perceive this we must bear in mind the two charges 
made at his trial, blasphemy and treason. Both had been 
implied in the question concerning his authority and the 
paying of tribute, and both are best answered here. 
Christ calls his enemies to the main point in dispute, 
" What think ye of Christ." Quotes Ps. 110— admitted 
by Jews to be Messianic — they do not den} 7 his Davidic 
descent. Christ shows that 0. T. declares him to be very 
God and very man. He is David's son and yet David's 
Lord. By introduction of this element, the greatest 
commandment of the Law is fully stated. The effect was 
— the common people heard him gladly. His opponents 
cease their questioning. Notice : the statement, " No man 



142 

durst ask him any more questions," is made by each of 
the Evangelists, but at different points : Mt. 22 : 46, — after 
Christ's counter questions ; Mk. 12 : 34 — after Lawyer's 
question; Lk. 20: 40— after Sadducees' question. This 
difference not contradictory ; for connection is really the 
same. Account of woman taken in adultery, John 8 : 1- 
II, inserted here by Lange. But external authority is 
against the genuineness of the record. 

§122. Judicial discourse against the Pharisees. The ap- 
propriate close of the struggle appears in the denunciatory 
discourse. Christ sums up all that he has said against 
the Pharisees during his ministry. A considerable part 
of the discourse appears in Lk. II. How is the resem- 
blance to be explained? Two theories. 1. The same 
language could have been twice uttered. It is likely 
therefore that one Evangelist borrowed from the other— 
or supplemented by memory from other discourses. 2. 
Both passages are historical. No warrant for any other 
view — appropriateness of passage here is evident. Divi- 
sions of the discourse in Mt. vs. 1-13 are occupied with a 
statement of the true character of the Pharisees — desire 
of praise, uppermost rooms, greeting in the market, &c. 

§123. Discourse continued. Woes upon the Pharisees. 
Series of 7 or 8. These are the severest words ever 
uttered by Christ. All previous blood shed from Abel 
to present required of this generation. Jews guilty of 
same sins as their fathers and were to suffer for sins of 
fathers. The sins of Pharisees were national and brought 
national disaster. Yet Christ shows his mercy and love 
in his lamentation over Jerusalem vs. 37, 38. " Blessed 
is he that cometh " refers to second advent or resurrec- 
tion of Christ, 

Counterpart of Sermon on Mount, often noticed. In 
that, we have delineation of character of those who re- 
ceive the kingdom and statement of consequent bless- 
ings. In this, a description of those who reject the 
kingdom and a recital of consequent woes. 

§124. The Widow's Mite. From connection in Mt. it 
is inferred that departure from the Temple was imme- 
diately after close of the judicial discourse. In depart- 
ing our Lord has one warm glance at piety of 0. T. 
Incident here recorded is in contrast with preceding dis- 



143 

course. Sitting down to watch the worshippers casting 
gifts into the treasury, he sees a widow cast in two 
lepta, less than one-fifth of a cent. Bengel remarks that 
light is thrown upon her act by her throwing in two lepta, 
for she might have kept one. Christ commends her 
sacrificing spirit. 

§125. Visit of certain Greeks. John 12: 20-26 is perti- 
nent illustration of supplementary character of John's 
gospels. Notice : 1. Connection in John — he records 
nothing of Ions: discourses against the Pharisees. But 
a knowledge of it is essential to the understanding of 
this event. John therefore puts it in contrast with the 
bitterness of the Pharisees as recorded in the Synoptists. 
2. Connection in harmony suggests similar idea. At 
the close of the day of conflict with Pharisees, the 
Greeks appear as the representatives of the Gentiles and 
accept that kingdom which the Jews reject. Many har- 
monists refuse to separate this event from connection in 
which it stands in John, making it take place on the 
day of Christ's public entrance. Lange arbitrarily places 
it on same day the Temple was cleansed. But it comes 
in most naturally when he leaves the Temple finally. 
Were the Greeks allowed to see Jesus? Some think 
that the interview was deferred until after the Resurrec- 
tion, but there would be no force in Christ's reply to the 
disciples, if the Greeks were not present. The incident 
an appropriate close of the day of conflict. 

§126. John's reflections upon the unbelief of the Jews: 
John 12 : 37-50. Verses 44-50 are last words of Jesus 
or a summing up of the Evangelists, because 1. They 
are introduced after Christ went away and hid himself, as 
if they were something remembered. 2. Jesusstood and 
cried, which implies a great audience. 

§§127-130. Great Prophetic Discourse on the destruction 
of Jerusalem, the end of the world and the second advent. 
Having kept possession of the Temple for three days and 
having been rejected by the Jews, Christ now leaves it 
finally. Seated upon the Mt. of Olives his disciples 
come to him and speak concerning the Temple. His 
public teaching had ended, but there were two import- 
ant instructions to disciples. 1. The outward progress 
of the kingdom of Messiah until the second advent. 2. 



■ 144 

John 14 — 17 chaps, give the inward and spiritual condi- 
tions by which the outward triumph was to be secured. 
Such instructions naturally private, and necessary for 
completion of his church's preparation. In the O. T. 
prophecy, the advent, the outpouring of the spirit, the 
foundation of the church and the final triumph of the 
Messiah's kingdom are as a whole connected together. 
To the O. T. prophecies concerning himself, he had, at 
different times, added his suffering, death and resurrec- 
tion, the persecution of his disciples and the necessity of 
patient self-denying labor. The great prophecy belongs 
therefore to the transition stage in the development of 
prophecy. It stands related both to the 0. T. prophecies 
and those of Paul and the Apocalypse. Two things 
must be always remembered : 1. The main design of 
the discourse was practical, to induce patient watch- 
fulness. Hence a large part of Mt's 25 ch. is in form of 
parables enforcing this duty. Signs of the advent given 
are all negative. The disciples are to be on their guard 
against misunderstanding them. 2. The indefinite con- 
ceptions of disciples connecting the advent and the end 
of the world largely condition the form of our Lord's 
discourse. The combination of these events is the great 
difficulty of the prophecy. Christ says " this generation 
shall not pass away before all be fulfilled." The dis- 
ciples, questions contain three periods according to the 
pre-millenial theory: 1. When shall these things be? 
2. What shall be the sign of thy coming? 3. And of 
the end of the world. 

It is best to find only two periods with two correspond- 
ing questions. 1. When shall the destruction of Jerusa- 
lem be? and, 2. When shall be the time of thy coming? 
with which the disciples naturally associated the end of 
the world. 

Relates other Parables — the stewards, the virgins and 
the talents. Parable of virgins teaches not only duty of 
watchfulness but of watchful preparation. Bridegroom 
delaying his coming shows that the time of advent is 
distant. A current pre-millenial theory encounters in 
this parable a serious difficulty. Strauss, Alford and 
others make it refer to Christ's coming at the first Resur- 
rection. Bride is restored Jewish Church: the virgins 



145 

are the Gentiles who will accompany him. Some hold 
that the exclusion of virgins is not final. 

Parable af the Talents. This acids fruitfnlness to watch- 
ful preparation. A close relation between parable of 
King's Son and the Great Supper. So this resembles 
that of the Pounds given in Lk. The differences are in 
the sums given and the returns obtained. In Lk. equal 
sums produce different results. In Mt. the sums are 
different, the increase is proportionate and the rewards 
are equal. Taken together they teach that the gifts of 
Heaven are all of grace, but that men are to be rewarded 
according to their fidelity. In verses 31-46 we have the 
last words concerning the judgment day, where we find 
ground upon which rewards and punishments are to be 
based— the treatment of his people. 

Is the discourse parabolic or prophetic? Arguments 
for the former: 1. Its position, following so many para- 
bles. 2. Its figures — the goats and sheep, and their 
separation, the colloquy between the good and the evil 
and the Judge. For its prophetic character and literal 
interpretation : 1. The language is didactic and not 
figurative and the form is changed from the parabolic to 
the prophetic. 2. The king of the previous parables is not 
mentioned— prominent figure is the Son of Man. But if 
this be a prophecy which judgment is meant? of the 
elect or of the non-elect ? oris it the General Judgment? 
The Millenarians as Stier, Alford, &c, say it is judgment 
of the zdvq as distinguished from that of the sxAyToc, and 
give these reasons : 1. Test of judgment is not faith but 
charity. Christians are however to be judged by their 
faith. Ans : The works mentioned are expressions of 
faith — the outward duty is taken for the inward state. 
2. The parties judged are self-righteous "Lord when 
saw we, &c," Ans.: The language used is in reality an 
expression of humility. Is it the final judgment ? The 
majority of authorities take this view. The prophecy is 
the fitting climax of his teaching concerning his king- 
dom. 

§131. Conspiracy of Rulers and Treason of Judas. The 
perplexity of the priests stands in contrast with Christ's 
foreknowledge. They had concluded they could not 
take him at the feast, but Jesus knew that he was to die. 



146 

Mt. 26 : 1, 2 contain a, distinct prediction of the cruci- 
fixion. The baffled rulers hold council and seek how 
they may accomplish his death by craft. Opportu- 
nity for them — Judas appears. They are rejoiced and 
offer him a bribe. The traitor sets himself to watch an 
opportunity to betray his master without inciting resist- 
ance. Opportunity is offered sooner than lie expected. 
The Synoptists go back to the Supper at Bethany to ac- 
count for his appearance. His hypocrisy was there exposed 
and by his malice the purpose of God was accomplished. 
When did Judas go to the Priests? If he went to them 
on Saturday night after the Supper he was in collusion 
with them during the prophetic day ; or he may have 
formed the design in his mind during the feast, and have 
held an interview with the priests on Tuesday night when 
they were enraged by Christ's discourses, and ready to 
make a bargain with him. Or if Robinson's arrange- 
ment be correct, placing the Supper on Tuesday night, 
then Judas was with the priests on Wednesday. The 
choice is between the two first views. When did con- 
sultation of priests occur, Tuesday or Wednesday? It 
depends upon the method of counting the "two days" 
spoken of by Christ. Some, as Alford and Ellicott, 
count inclusively, making it Wednesday night. The more 
common way is to count exclusively. Two days before 
Thursday brings it then to Tuesday evening. The plot- 
ting was at same time as the discourses. This leaves 
Wednesday as a day of rest in Bethany, a feature of the 
history which Robinson's scheme leaves out. The Con- 
sultation of the Pharisees was informal, and held in the 
court of Caiaphas — tradition says at his country house 
at the top of the Hill of Evil Counsel, where monu- 
ment of Annas the father-in-law of Caiaphas is found. 
The price of betrayal, recorded by Mt. only, was 30 pieces 
of silver, about $18, the price of a slave, Ex. 21 : 32. 
Zech. 11 : 12, 13. Smallness of price shows contempt of 
rulers for Christ. Character and motives of Judas. His 
name Iscariot is variously explained. Some make it 
mean, man with a bag ; others, strangling, alluding 
to his death. But most commonly, ish Kerioth, a 
man of Kerioth, a place in South of Judea. His 
office among the Twelve was steward or almoner, 



147 

(Lk. 8 : 1-3.) The mone}' entrusted to him was not only 
for the support of Christ and his disciples but for charity. 
Difficulties: 1. Strauss and Meyer say that Synoptisls 
and John do not harmonize — former say Judas went to 
the Priests immediately after the feast in Bethany, the 
latter, after Satan had entered into him at the Supper. 
Aus. : According to the accounts Satan entered into him 
at different times. The objection takes for granted that 
Judas could not have dallied with an evil thought for 
several days. All that John says is that his sin was in 
consequence of the entrance of Satan. 2. It is alleged 
that the Gospels do not furnish an adequate motive for 
Judas' treachery — the amount paid is too small even for 
the priests to offer, much less for Judas to accept. Ans : 
The objection does not properly estimate either the 
power or the extent of covetousness. The smallest sum 
is sufficient incentive for the greatest crime when it is 
once admitted as a motive power. 

Contrast with Mary : At the Supper, the disciples com- 
plained of the waste occasioned by the anointing of 
Christ. In succeeding verses Synoptists go on to show 
that Judas sold Christ for 30 pieces of silver, one-third 
the cost of anointing. Contrast not fortuitous. John 
says Judas did not care for the poor, but complained of 
the waste because he was a thief and had the bag. John 
therefore puts character of Judas on a still lower level, — 
not only covetous but dishonest. 3. It is said that the 
rebuke of Jesus was too mild to cause resentment ; i. e. 
Judas was too bad a man to be offended at a mild rebuke. 
Ans: To be exposed for meanness before a company is 
not pleasant however mild the language of rebuke. 
Dilemma : Did Jesus know the character of Judas when 
he chose him for a disciple ? John says he knew his true 
character a year before. If so how then explain Mr. 26:* 
24? If Jesus knew him, why did he appoint him trea- 
surer and place him in way of temptation ? Why did lie 
choose him as a disciple at all, and why did he bear so 
long with his hypocrisy ? Yet on other hand if Christ 
did not know him, he was not omniscient. Ans : Judas 
was necessary to the bringing about of the crucifixion. 
Strauss declares he was not. We answer, the divine plan 
was that Jesus should sutler at the feast, and to this end 



148 

was Judas foreordained. Christ's death was to be ac- 
complished by the lowest form of human depravity — 
dying for the sins of men, he must die through "the 
most heinous phase of sin. His humiliation is the deeper 
on account of Judas's treachery. Neander's idea : 
Christ thought he could reform Judas, who was a political 
adventurer. This view is held by some. Judas expected 
to hold a high position in Messiah's kingdom, but Christ's 
public entrance and the discourses following assured him 
his hopes could not be realized, and filled with rage and 
disappointment he betrays Jesus. Alford and others 
think Judas may have been uncertain as to the result. 
His betrayal of Jesus was intended only to result in his 
trial. Even on this theory, notice Judas took care to 
get the money. Whately and Hanna aver that Judas 
thought Jesus would rescue himself by some great mira- 
cle, expecting thus to have establishment of Christ's 
external kingdom hastened. His motive thus made out 
to beagoodone. Ans : 1. It is inconceivable that Judas 
could have had such an idea — he must then have been 
insane. 2. In the Gospels the motive made prominent 
is covetousness, which was sufficient toproduce the result. 
To this is joined resentment for rebuke received from 
Christ at the Supper. 

3. A fair inference is that he was disappointed in his 
expectations as to the nature of the kingdom. This 
however does not alleviate the bad character of the man. 
" By their fruits ye shall know them." Lange says that 
when Judas received the money he put himself outside 
the pale of honorable motives. 

§132. Preparation for the Passover. Wieseler and Rob- 
inson say Nisan 14th. Bleek and Tischendorf say Thurs- 
day, Nisan 15th. Wednesday had been spent as a day of 
quiet at Bethany. The common arrangement adds to 
this rest a portion of Thursday. The Passover Supper 
was eaten on the first (ttj npcor/j) day of the feast of 
^Unleavened Bread — in the evening: During the day 
close search was made for leaven which was the symbol 
of that which must be put away. That this Supper was 
the regular Passover Supper is proved, 1. By rq nptorq. 
This expression implies that it must be so. 2. From the 
definite expression that follows, '< When the Passover 



149 

most be killed." 3. Agrees with fact that priests had to 
kill the lamb in the Temple. 4. The remark of the dis- 
ciples, "where shall we prepare,'' &c., shows that the 
time had come. Sends two disciples who find the place 
by a miraculous method. Objection that Mt. makes no 
mention of this. But there is no contradiction, and the 
miraculous is implied. Objection : Difficulty of obtaining 
a place after preparations had been so long delayed. 
Jerusalem crowded, even surrounding hills being occu- 
pied with tents. Answer : Enough for the man to be 
told, "the master needs a room." Secrecy the reason of 
dela}' ; state of feeling in the city concerning Christ and 
bargain of Judas on previous evening made it necessary. 
Finding room as directed, Peter and John prepare for 
the Supper, unleavened bread, bitter herbs, and a lamb. 
Lamb, previously purchased and set apart, was carried 
to temple between three and six o'clock ; slain by the 
priests and its blood sprinkled. 

Passover Supper. Order of Events. Difference of opin- 
ion — on several points certainty is impossible. But 
best harmonists are substantially agreed. Mt. and Mk. 
agree in simple narrative. Lk. gives Christ's words at 
opening of the meal. John gives incident of washing 
disciples' feet. Commonly agreed that contention for 
precedency and the washing of feet are to be placed 
together; because (a) Former would naturally occur 
upon taking places at the table; (b) Latter, in beginning 
or during the meal. Our version (John 13:2) implies 
it was after the meal — ysvopivou should be jcvophoo, sup- 
per " being come" ; [c) connection in Lk. (v. 24) eyeusro 
Ss, an aorist, better rendered "there was," not " had 
been " ; {d) Design of Lk. for narrating events out of 
natural order, was to contrast solemnity of scene and 
Christ's authority and dignity with laxity of disciples. 
Lk.'s order is : Christ's words — question of precedency 
— Peter's denial, and desertion of all ; (e) Find natural 
order in John ; (/-) The internal agreement of Luke's 
account with John's reads like one narrative. 

Was Judas present at the Eucharist? Lk. puts institu- 
tion before pointing out of traitor; Mt. and Mk. after. 
Most reformed writers deny presence of Judas, because 
a. Inherent probability that he was sent out before the 



150 

sacrament, b. John says, (13: 30,) Judas went out im- 
mediate^ after receiving the sop, and Eucharist not be- 
fore that. c. Pointing out was while eating, hut sacra- 
ment was after supper. Judas took wine as well as bread 
before he left. d. Lk. changes order. 1. To contrast 
spirit of Supper and spirit of disciples. 2. Mention of 
cup in v. 17 naturally leads him to describe the Supper. 

Exact time of instituting Sacrament. See Lightfoot for 
description of Rabbinical customs. Possible that Christ 
followed all the customs and observances, but still evi- 
dent that Lord's Supper was grafted on the Paschal Sup- 
per. Cannot identify exact time. Christ may have 
chosen to contrast the Supper. 

§133. Opening words and contention of the Twelve. They 
were seated — original rule to stand, reminding of haste 
in leaving Egypt. Christ in sanctioning this departure 
from the rule, teaches that we are not bound in unessen- 
tials. Prominence of Suffering. " With desire I have de- 
sired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer " — 
hinting that his suffering was near at hand. Reason for 
the desire — "For I will not eat again until it be fulfilled 
in the kingdom of God " — makes last supper emphatic. 
He takes "cup of blessing" — not cup of sacrament, 
which is mentioned in 20 v. Inference is unfounded, 
that Christ did not partake. Main idea of passage is in 
Kfoipwdrj. Central point of economy of Redemption is 
reached — type fulfilled in presence of Antetype. Notice 
allusion to the formulas of feast in vjxaotar^aa.z. 

Contention for pre-eminence. Objections to its occurrence. 
1. Strauss and DeWette. Mentioned only in Lk. and 
the promise of exaltation is out of place. 2. Unnatural 
that such dispute should occur among disciples at such a 
time. Ans: It had occurred before, and clearly shows 
strong impression existing among them even now' of 
external nature of Christ's kingdom. Jesus rebukes 
their worldly spirit — 'teaching that only humility can 
exalt; commends fidelity and promises exaltation to 
thrones of judgment of twelve tribes. 

§134. Washing Disciples feet. It may have been done 
on entering, John 13: 1-20; hinted at in Lk. 22: 27. 
John puts it after receiving of wine. Three lessons : a. 
Proof of continued love of Christ. b. Example of 



151 

humility, c. Implied sanctification — washing of grace, 
a part of Christ's service. John only refers to Juclas's 
treachery 13 : 11. Ps. 41 : 9 fulfilled. 

§135. Pointing out the Traitor. Separation of Judas 
preceded the sacrament. Christ's distress very great at 
horror of the crime and sorrow for Judas. Announce- 
ment withheld till now that Judas may he kept near. 
Made now : 1. To show Christ's foreknowledge, and 
make disciples helieve after it occurred. 2. To he rid of 
Judas' presence. 3. To carry out Christ's design of being 
crucified at the Feast. 4. As a warning to disciples and 
all his followers. 

Effect on Disciples : At intimation of Christ that one 
of them should betray him — natural they should not 
suspect Judas. Ask each other " Is it I ?" Translation 
does not give force of Gk'.; better read, " Lord it is not 

1, is it ?" More simple and negative. Synoptists make 
each disciple ask it of Christ. John omits this ; says 
Peter beckoned to John to ask. Mt. and Mark give 
Christ's reply, "He that dippeth," &c; John, " To whom 
I give the sop." 

Objections: 1. John's account does not imply private 
communication of Peter, and act of dipping together 
could not be distinctive. Ans : The act of simultaneous 
dipping could be so marked as to call attention to Judas. 

2. If public sign given, it could not afterwards be said 
they did not understand his treason. Ans: Objection 
based on wrong conception of amount of their knowl- 
edge. They did not know that betrayal would lead to 
crucifixion. Andrews, &c, put questions of Syn. prior 
to that of John, and point to iniquity of deed. Again 
Mt. and Mk's description more general than John's. 

"Son of Man goeth but woe, &c," often 

quoted in proof of eternal punishment on ground that 
hope of salvation after period of disappointment would 
always render life desirable rather than never to have 
been born. 

Judas's perplexity : Feeling that the words were di- 
rected to him and seeing attention of disciples directed 
to him, he asks also, " Is it I?" — consummate hypocrisy. 
Night when he went out, implies quickness of his plan — 
time was God's, deed was Judas's. Also significant of 



152 

darkness he was soon to enter. Christ's glorying is 
come. Departure of Judas was sign of his victory — and 
the beginning of his death and glory. " A new Com- 
mandment ;" new not in principle or in measure, but in 
degree and mode. Brotherly love among christians made 
test of discipleship — love flowing from faith in Christ. 

§136. Prediction of Peter's denial and dispersion of the 
Twelve. John relates denial in close connection with 
Christ's prophecy about going away. Lk. in connection 
with strife for precedence ; Mt. and Mk. after the sacra- 
ment, as if spoken on way to Gethsemane. Two alterna- 
tives : Robinson combines these — prediction uttered once 
and before sacrament. Mt. and Mk. therefore relate 
them retrospectively. Meyer, &c, say, prediction was 
uttered twice to include twelve with Peter ; at the Supper. 
John and Lk.; and on way to Gethsemane, (Mt. and Mk.) 

Design of prediction to fortify disciples and prepare them 
for trial of their faith — their conception of Christ's 
kingdom was so mistaken, they needed to be humbled. 
This design shown also in Christ's appointment to go be- 
fore into Galilee after his resurrection. What they did 
does not indicate utter apostasy — still sheep, though scat- 
tered. He will deliver them by interceding — " I have 
prayed for you that your faith fail not." The Cock's 
Crowing. Mt. , Lk. and John — % ' cock not crow;" Mk., 
" not crow twice till thou hast denied me thrice." 

§137. The Eucharist. The last passover culminated in 
the institution of the Sacrament It now becomes a 
commemorative and not a typical ordinance. Changed 
by Christ in person, its celebration by his people in 
future will signify to them; a. A memorial expressive 
of his dying love. b. A pledge or seal of his covenant. 
c. To be partaken of by all on his authority and thus 
unite them to him. Shows man's inability to live a 
spiritual life. Needs an outward sign to strengthen weak 
faith. This rite is distinctive mark of Christians in all 
ages; sets forth Christ's death, and spiritual presence — 
" the life of the crucified Savior." Precise tim.e not cer- 
tain. Paragraph in John so close that it is impossible 
to break it. Lange and Tisch. place it in 32 v. A more 
prevalent view is that sacrament came between 13 and 14 
chaps, of John — confirmed by hymn being sung after- 



153 

wards. Some associate the bread with the supper, and 
cup after — but more probable that the elements were not 
separated. Variations in words of record : Lk. and 
Paul (1 Cor. 11: 24) are alike; Mr. and Mk. are alike; 
but add, after distribution of bread the blessing of the 
cup. Explanation: Some think prayer was repeated — 
yet this was not essential to celebration or Paul would 
not have omitted it. But the blessing or thanksgiving 
should be made for both elements. Sceptics magnify 
these discrepancies. But these words are repeated con- 
versationally and taken from Aramaic where " is " is not 
expressed : " this my body." Note also that 1. These 
variations give fuller idea to the meaning. 2. They allow 
freedom in celebration of the sacrament. 3. How are 
we to distinguish between binding acts in the ordinance 
and those not binding? Ans : a. Nothing actually binding 
which does not appear in each account, b. Nothing 
binding which is not intended to be such, by Christ. 4. 
Is there distinction between breaking bread and pouring 
out of wine ? The two acts are really one. Paul makes 
no distinction — neither without the other. Bread sig- 
nifies nourishment of life. Wine shows more clearly 
atonement; by blood of new covenant we are united to 
Christ. 5. Did Jesus commune ? Lk. 22 : 17. "Took 
cup and gave thanks," &c. Meyer and others think our 
Lord only gave to disciples and did not partake himself. 
A 1 ford, that lie took of Supper, but not of Sacrament 
Most think there is no distinction. He partakes with his 
people — as their head. " I will no niore drink of it," 
&c, implies that lie drank. 

Sceptical Objections : Strauss admits a degree of proba- 
bility in the occurrence of the Supper. Jesus may have 
instituted it as a rallying point for his disciples. Others 
deny any evidence that it was to be repeated as a bind- 
ing ordinance. It was only for disciples — had no refer- 
ence to the future. The celebration is due to and rests 
upon Paul's words (I Cor. 11 ch.,) written long after 
its adoption by the church and therefore must have 
grown up at a later period. Ans: 1. Perpetual obser- 
vance is alluded to by the Syn. Mention of the Pass- 
over itself is enough. " My blood of the new covenant 
shed for many," has no meaning if confined to disciples. 



154 

" I will notdrinkit until I drink it new in the kingdom," 
&c., referred by best exegesis to union and communion 
of Christ with his disciples. 2. Institution does not rest 
on divine communication to church alone, but on author- 
ity of the Twelve as inspired witnesses. It is thus one 
of the most important and authoritative monumental 
records. It was universal in the church from earliest 
times, must therefore have been established by the 
apostles. Second Objection : John's Gospel leaves out 
the Supper, but gives washing of disciples' feet. Ans : 
John is supplementary. 

Strauss asks why then did he not leave out the feeding 
of the 5000, which is in all other Gospels ? John would 
naturally be disposed to mention supper, especially on 
opportunity to correct a false representation. Ans : 
Supper already in church when John wrote and there- 
fore needed no mention. Strauss says too important to 
be left out. Ans : It was not adapted to John's purpose. 
Strauss denies this. 

Others say John was ignorant of the institution. This 
supposition would accord with John's context but not 
with his practice. His purpose to record Christ's long 
discourses requires mention of feeding 5000. Omission 
of Lord's Supper only shows characteristic difference 
between John and other evangelists. 

§§138 — 141. Final Discourse and Prayer. John's ac- 
count, 14-17 chs., to be inserted in Mt. 26 between 29 
and 30 vs.; in Mk. 14 between 25 and 26 vs. Different 
opinions: a. He went into a safe room unknown to 
Judas, b. Lange, &c, infer that John 14 was spoken at 
table, and remainder of discourse on way to Gethsemane. 
c. Difficulty then of separating discourse. When was 
hymn sung ? Whether last thing before they went out, 
or after John 14: 31, or after the whole is uncertain. 

Historical position and design of Discourse : A summing 
up of Christ's teaching as a system — complete — con- 
nected with his £oino: away. It is our Lord's fullest ex- 
position of the consequences of his resurrection and gift 
of Holy Spirit — properly a transitional discourse. Per- 
sonal position of disciples a type of the church — they 
were in sorrow and fear. He teaches necessity of his 
going away and promises to send Holy Spirit to build up 



155 

the spiritual kingdom be had established. Compare 
previous discourse in Mt. 24 and 25 on great prophetic 
day. Interval of vicissitudes and judgments between 
bis death and second Advent, but inward life and knowl- 
edge of church were also to be extended. It combines 
the general elements with personal elements of tender- 
ness and love. Every distress of the believer finds relief 
in these chapters — germ of the Gospel. Meyer says no 
need to descend to proof of divine origin. 

Common misconception in regard to thedisciples think- 
ing too much of what they ought to have been. Narra- 
tive guards against this; Christ said so much in order 
that the spirit might bring to their remembrance what 
had been said. Tbey were in trouble and in sympathy 
with their Lord, but did not understand their condition. 
The whole prophecy was addressed to their misconception. 

Analysis : Ch. 14, Christ goes to the Father, and promi- 
ses the Spirit — vs. 1-14 ; going to the Father, he would 
answer prayer — vs. 15-17; give Holy Spirit — vs. 18-24; 
does not imply separation from his disciples. 

Conditions, vs. 25-26 : Inspiration ; vs. 21-30. Bene- 
diction. Ch. 15, Chi ist the Vine: Fundamental work of 
the spirit, union with Christ. Those holding that he set 
out for Gethsemane after record in 14th ch., say figure 
was suggested to him by a vine on the roadside and by 
burning of pruned branches; others, that he took figure 
from gold vine around the pillars of the Temple ; others, 
with more probability, that association of the cup was 
sufficient. Ys. 1-11 : Union, condition of fruit-fulness 
and of God's love: vs. 12-19; Union with each 
other; vs. 20-25: Relation to the world; vs. 26, 
27: Personal and official gift of Hoi}' Spirit. Chp. 
16, Work of Holy Spirit; vs. 1-4, belong to last 
ch.; persecution predicted ; vs. 5-15 : Work of Holy 
Spirit in the world to convince and guide the church to 
truth ; vs. 15-22 : Departure immediate ; vs. 23, 24 : 
Hearer of prayer ; vs. 25-33, Father's love and warning. 

Ch. 17, Sacerdotal Prayer : Ys. 1-5, for himself, that 
he maj' be glorified; vs. 6-11, for disciples that they 
might be one ; vs. 12-19, that they may be sanctified ; 
vs. 20-23 prays for all believers; vs. 24-26, that they 
might be brought to his glory. 



156 

§142. Gethsemane. The Syn. record the agony in the 
Garden. After singing the Hallel., Christ descends to 
the streets to go to Olivet, A cold night — Peter warmed 
himself; and it was moonlight, for the Passover was at 
full-moon. Preparation completed, he went according to 
his custom to Olivet to spend the interval in prayer. 
Passing out of the eastern gate, he descends to the 
brook Kedron (fr. xs&poz, cedar, or to be dark) now red 
with blood of sacrifice; a stream dry in Summer, but 
swollen in Winter from rain ; its bed 60 to 80 feet below 
the present surface. Crossing this they reach ycopeov, a 
cultivated spot — Gethsemane — surrounded by a stone 
wall 150 or 160 feet high, situated half a mile from the 
city wall. Objection: Too near the city for retirement. 
Ans : It may have been concealed by trees. Traditional 
site contains eight olive trees said to have been growing 
in time of Christ, and the tax-levy on which can be 
traced up to occupation of Jerusalem by Arabs in seventh 
century. 

Leaving the rest to pray, he takes Peter, James and 
John to witness his sorrow ; prays alone, returns, finds 
them asleep ; remonstrates " Could ye not watch with 
me one hour?" wc The spirit is willing but the flesh is 
weak." Some say this is an apology for their weakness ; 
others that spiritual or regenerated nature was willing 
but corrupt nature weak; others, sleep clue to force or 
depth of personal feeling. But Jesus evidently treats it 
as a weakness. The prayer : Mt. and Mk. say it was 
thrice repeated " falling on his face." Lk. says " kneel- 
ing down" and intimates no repetition— an angel ap- 
peared and he prayed more intensely. Lk. adds also, 
" his sweat was as it were great drops of blood." Some 
say, like blood, i. e. in large drops. More commonly 
understood as blood-colored — showing sympathy of his 
physical with spiritual nature ; agony caused palpitation 
of heart, weakening the frame so that blood oozed from 
the pores and colored the sweat. Prayer for relief not 
to be explained away ; it was real and sincere. " Thy 
will be done ;" same words he taught his disciples. 
These words play conspicuous part in discussions of Per- 
son of Christ — being exhibition of weakness of his 
humanity. No authority to restrict the " cup " to suffer- 



157 

ings id Gethsemane — refers also to his death. Mk. says 
this hour, i. e. appointed season of the passion. That 
suffering was natural anguish upon approaching death, 
is lowest view and unsatisfactory, giving ground to infi- 
dels who say others not having as lofty notions as Christ 
died more nobly. Strauss makes it derogatory to char- 
acter of Jesus and considers accounts given only as 
opinions. Kenan suggests a moral ground for his suf- 
fering — his disappointed expectations, and sorrow for 
his people. None of these theories sufficient to account 
for fact. Suffering therefore must have been for sin. 
His anticipations, though great, were exceeded bj 7 reality. 
This excess of anticipated distress not superfluous. Some 
suggest its important relation to agony on the cross; 
showing suffering as moral in nature, not merely physi- 
cal. But suffering in garden was greater than at cruci- 
fixion — throws light also on mind of Jesus and gives im- 
portant examples. Notice: First trial— in blood-like 
sweat — was private. His inevitable anguish hidden from 
profane eyes of men ; at cross he was as a lamb led to 
slaughter. 

Objections: 1. Discrepancies between Mk. and Lk. 
2. Lack of sympathy in the discourse. John passes over 
agony entirely. 4. Main objection: Synoptists' account 
inconsistent with John 14-17 chaps, especially in prayer; 
not only an impossible change of mood but a falling from 
state of strength and majesty to one of doubt and con- 
flict; hence either one or both accounts not historical. 
5. Unnatural for Christ to deliver a long discourse at 
such a time and impossible for John to remember it. 
Strauss, more consistent than the rest, considers it amyth, 
and makes these its stages : a. After the Passover, rev- 
erence of believers led them to think Christ's sufferings 
were foreknown to him. 6, He not only foreknew, but 
had actually experienced them. c, Had also intended 
them beforehand. Ans : No real difficulty ; John says 
he speaks ; Syn., agonizes. No change of purpose but of 
feeling. Perfection of human nature would tend to 
change state of mind, while steadfast purpose under all 
suffering proves his divine nature. 

Reasoning of Rationalists Suicidal. They say natural 
anguish at approaching death not sufficient to account 



158 

for his intense suffering. They therefore admit the his- 
torical fact of the suffering. But this suffering is unac- 
countable except on ground of union of divine and human 
in Christ, and his suffering for sin. As long as history 
stands, sceptics are condemned. 

§143. Betrayal and Arrest. Jesus, returning from prayer 
the third time, and finding the disciples asleep, says, 
" Sleep on," and yet adds, "Arise." Sudden transition 
explained : a, As only a question : "Sleep ye on still ?" 
(Greswell and Robinson); b. As ironical (Calvin, Meyer); 
c. Better to suppose interval of time elapsed between the 
sentences. From his elevated position he sees the ap- 
proaching procession after he spoke first. He then adds, 
" Rise, let us be going." Mode of Betrayal: As Christ 
pointed out traitor by " a sop," Judas points Him out 
by " a kiss." Judas was at work while previous dis- 
course was going on. Priests still afraid of people, who 
would likely be about the streets on Passover night. 
Judas directs the priests. Mk. and Mt. say a crowd; 
Jno. a band and leader. Was it a Temple watch of 
Levites, or a Roman troop ? More likely the latter, as 
priests would get these on the plea of keeping peace. 
John says they came with torches; yet it was moonlight, 
No inconsistency because they expected to search in 
secret places. John says Jesus went forth and said, 
"Whom seek ye ?" They fell to the ground. Some regard 
this as effect of personal power of Jesus on their feelings. 
But words show it was miraculous — his answer to their 
display of force. Some charge that it was a theatrical 
display of power which he did not intend to use. Ans : 
A miraculous evidence of divinity appropriate to the 
occasion, and served also to shield the disciples. Ques- 
tion of harmony : John says Jesus immediately surrender- 
ed ; Syn. say Judas gave a sign. Some think he surren- 
dered, and then Judas, to keep his word, gave the kiss. 
Judas may have advanced too far beyond his companions, 
who could not notice the kiss, and therefore waited till 
Jesus came forward and addressed them. Robinson, 
Alford, &c, put incidents in John 18 : 4-9 before Judas' 
kiss. More probable that kiss was first. Peter's Sword: 
Christ rebukes him and heals the servant. John gives 
names. Syn. make Christ refer to cup of Gethsemane 



159 

which John had not related. Lk. adds another class of 
persons — priests, elders and captains of Temple. These 
may have been present from first and taken no part, or 
have arrived subsequently. Flight of Disciples needs 
explanation. They could not understand all the predic- 
tions. Until now they had always seen Christ victorious, 
and seeing him make no resistance are thrown upon their 
faith, which fails them. To understand their action, 
must look from their standpoint. The young man with 
linen garment — mentioned only by Mark. Why insert 
this when so much else of importance? Ans : a, Inci- 
dent is a stroke of reality. When the mind is aroused 
the smallest thing will strike it. Minute things confirm 
the account, b, A familiar incident in court of justice. 
Garment a common nightdress, conspicuous. It attracted 
the men and they seized it, when he fled naked. <?, The 
young man was John Mark himself (Lichtenstein). 
Omits name from modesty. This removes all difficulty. 
Likely, for his mother was living in the city. Lange 
thinks he owned the vineyard and had been asleep in the 
watch tower. 

§144. Jesus led to Annas. Difficulties in harmony are 
here presented. Jesus is led before Annas and examined 
before Caiaphas. Jews are under necessity for haste. 
The arrest is contrary to law, and they are afraid to hold 
him prisoner on account of the people and his own mirac- 
ulous power. While one part engaged with Judas, 
another notifies the Sanhedrim. Their plan — to secure 
sentence of death before an ecclesiastical court, then as 
matter of form receive permission to execute it from the 
civil court. If Sanhedrim sentenced him on charge of 
blasphemy, the people would be gained to their side. 
Plan almost succeeded, but was made subservient to 
foreordained plan of God. Difference in accounts : Each 
gospel has its own plan ; Mt. contrasts Christ as Messiah 
and King with his rejection by the people; Mk. gives 
vivid descriptions of particular events, e. g., of Peter's 
denials; Lk., human maltreatment of Jesus contrasted 
with his dignity and love. So much is recorded in the 
different accounts, and each having a different design 
necessitates differences; but a knowledge of all removes 
all difficulties. Three stages in the ecclesiastical trial : 1. 



160 

Preliminary questioning by High Priest. 2. Trial before 
Sanhedrim. 3. The sentence and resolution to take Him 
to Pilate. Mr. and Mk. thus give the order: Before 
Caiaphas, Peter's denials, Sanhedrim in morning. Lk. 
gives: Peter's denials, the mocking, the morning trial. 
Jno. gives : Meeting with Annas as the first High Priest, 
Peter's first denial, examination, Peter's denials. Mt. 
and Mk. alike, except Mk. omits name of High Priest. 
Jesus is charged and condemned by His own confession. 
Lk. differs, giving Peter's denial, then the morning trial, 
account of which is almost same as that given by Mt. 
and Mk. of council and trial held at night. 1. Question 
of Harmony is between Syns. and Jno. Jno. represents 
Jesus, before Annas; Syn. before Caiaphas. Is Jno. 18 : 
13-24 a preliminary examination before Annas, or only 
before him to be sent by him to Caiaphas? Wieseler, 
Tisch. Ell., Lange, &c. consider it one examination. But 
this difficulty arises : Syn. say Peter's denials occurred in 
house of Caiaphas, and examination and denials were at 
same place at same time. Hence Meyer and Blackie 
consider this an irreconcilable contradiction. One sup- 
position, however, removes all difficulty: Annas and 
Caiaphas occupied same house. No improbability in 
this. Annas was old man and father-in-law to Caiaphas 
(Stier, Ebrard, Alford, &c.) Solution : John's examination 
was also in house of Caiaphas. a, John's form of expres- 
sion — gives long description of Caiaphas, only naming 
Annas. They led him to Annas first, as father-in-law to 
Caiaphas. Again, John and Peter follow Jesus ; John 
knowing the High Priest entered his palace, and through- 
out describes the questioning as before High Priest, who 
was Caiaphas. Passage therefore is easy if we admit 
that Annas sent Jesus to Caiaphas at once, b, The de- 
nials of Peter are thus explained : Syn. and John repre- 
sent them in hall of Caiaphas. c, Objections to this view 
an argument in its favor; v. 24, "Now Annas had sent 
him bound to Caiaphas, the High Priest." In beginning 
they took him to Annas. Natural then to conclude that 
whatever occurred before v. 24 happened before Annas. 
On the other view theaorist ajrearsthv must be translated 
as a pluperfect, "had sent ;" but no need for forcing tense 
thus. Statement (vs. 24-28) must be taken parenthetic- 



161 

ally in connection with the blow of the hand. He was 
bound and therefore defenseless. Most harmonists take 
this view. 

Preliminary Examination, probably during interval be- 
fore Sanhedrim could assemble. Robinson's plan adopted, 
though he obscures plan by grouping Peter's denials by 
themselves. Why should Jesus be taken before Annas 
at all ? Because lie was father-in-law to Caiaphas and a 
man of influence and ability. In questioning, Jesus 
might show ground for accusing him. The examination 
was informal. John shows it to be such, evidently, what- 
ever view is taken. The High Priest's questions are 
concerning his doctrine and disciples; dtoayr^ includes 
substance and mode of teaching. Christ's answer, as in 
the garden, shields the disciples. His teaching had 
always been open. -'Ask them which heard me." He 
disappointed the purpose of the High Priest and he was 
struck by an attendant, and only returned a mi id rebuke. 
Violence having commenced, steadily increased. Objec- 
tion to John's account: He omits examination of witnesses 
and forms of trial as given by Syn. as well as Christ's 
avowal of Messiahship. Hence gives no issue to the trial. 
Ann : a, John adheres to his supplementary plan, b, 
Conclusion is involved in 19 eh., 7 v.: ' k VVe have a law, 
and by our law lie ought to die." <?, Charge of blasphemy 
was not real ground on which Caiaphas consented to 
crucifixion — but consent of Pilate. 

Peter's Denials: In John, during first examination; 
Mt. and Mk. postpone them till the formal trial. All 
agree it was at night, before cock crew. Lk. therefore 
puts denials first, because failure of the disciples' faith in 
him was no small element of his suffering. John tells 
how they gained admission to the palace — one of them 
being known to the High Priest They were soon sep- 
arated. Peter warms by the fire in the court. First 
Denial: No special difficulty. Addressed by damsel or 
portress, whose attention was probably attracted at his 
entrance. ISTo one joined her in her accusation. Second 
Denial: Went to the porch afterwards when the cock 
crew. Mk. same girl ; Mt. another ; Lk. a man. John, 
"they." Probable that portress addressed him again in 
presence of another maid who joined in — others repeat 



162 

it. Third Denial: An interval perhaps of an hour had 
elapsed. Peter, to allay suspicion, joins in conversation 
and betrays his Galilean language. Kinsman of Malchus 
(John) begins to accuse him, and is joined by bystanders 
Charge now made by so many, and on good grounds, 
threatens immediate danger, and Peter therefore denies 
with oaths. Cock crew about 3 a. m. Sceptics say eight 
or nine denials ; but the charges may have been man}*, 
with only three denials. " Looked upon Peter." Jesus 
was in the large hall, Peter in the court in sight. Or it 
may have occurred as Jesus was passing from Annas to 
Caiaphas. See Andrews, p. 491, seq. 

§145. Jesus before Sanhedrim. Mt. and Mk. put meet- 
ing of Sanhedrim and condemnation before Peter's deni- 
als, as if at night, and distinguish a reassembling in thj 
morning. Lk. speaks of no night meeting but records 
all as happening in the morning. Is examination in Lk. 
22:66-71 different from iMt. 26:57,58, or is Luke's 
simply a fuller report of a second morning examination 
recorded in Mt. 27 : 1 ? Oris the last the same meeting, 
and therefore Mt. and Mk.'s accounts are to be transfer- 
red to the morning? Sceptics say they are irreconcila- 
ble. Most orthodox interpreters resort to the harmony, 
1. The simplest method is to consider that Mt. and Mk. 
describe a different meeting from Lk. (Lange and An- 
drews). The order then is: Christ taken from Annas 
and sent immediately to Caiaphas, who, while Sanhedrim 
is convening, questions Christ — then Peter's denials 
begin. Sanhedrim opens — trial goes on — mockery &c. — 
in the morning a formal session of Sanhedrim whose same 
questions are repeated and a charge of blasphemy brought. 
Christ sent to Pilate. This order has its plausibilities: 
a. It keeps each account in its own order, Mt. 27 : 1, Mk. 
15 : 1 agree with Lk. 22 : 66 as to time. b. The order of 
time favors it, " When it was day." Mk. is still stronger 
— sodscoz; Mt. and Lk. say early dawn. Lk.'s examination 
in the morning is parallel with what Mt. and Mk. say was 
early in the morning; natural impression from Mt. and 
Mk. is that trial was at night, c. Certain differences in 
the accounts imply two different meetings. In Lk. no 
formalities, no witness given. " Art thou the Christ," 
as if question was repeated, and designed to leave no 



163 

doubt in any mind that Christ really claimed to be such. 
Tins was the more necessary it" morning meeting was 
fuller and more formal, d. Jewish authorities affirm that 
it was illegal to try any case at night or pass sentence on 
same day as trial, e. The buffeting and mocking which 
Lk. records before morning session is likely same as Mt. 
and Mk. record at night. Robinson thinks they were 
repeated — difficult to suppose however, f Andrews &c, 
argue that morning session was in a different place from 
1 lie informal one at night. Lk. says they brought him 
to their own Council Chamber: the trial therefore in the 
house of High Priest is different from that in the Council 
Chamber. The Council Chamber of Sanhedrim — connected 
with the Temple enclosure. They were driven out of 
the place a year before the crucifixion, and held their ses- 
sion in shops. Argument for plan is doubtful. 2. Rob- 
inson, Ellicott, Alford, Meyer. Lichtenstein maintain that 
Mt. and Mk. are parallel with Lk. — only one trial, and 
that in morning. Main Reason for this view: the 
question in Lk. is so much like that in Mt. and Mk., 
it is not necessary to suppose it was repeated. The 
order then is: From Annas to Caiaphas — preliminary 
questions before Caiaphas when morning conies. Ohjee- 
tions to this view : a. Mt. and Mk. speak of presence of 
Sanhedrim in house of Caiaphas, when Jesus first arrives 
there. Robinson assumes that they mention this by an- 
ticipation, b. Mt. and Mk. transpose the denials of 
Peter, putting them after the trial, whereas the\ r happened 
during the night and during the trial, c. Mt. 27 : 1 and 
Mk. 15: 1 seem to imply a night and morning meeting. 
Some say not mean a new meeting but only a resumption 
of the narrative interrupted by mention of denial. Others 
suppose Matt. 27 : 1 was simply a private caucus of mem- 
bers. This method yields a perfectly good and historic- 
ally true narrative. The only historical difference 
between the two views is: Adoption of a trial by night 
would prove an unseemly haste on part of priests to carry 
out their design so early in morning. 

77?^ Trial. Was the court legally constituted and the 
trial fair? Salvador (Institt. de Mo'ise) views the trial 
from a Jewish standpoint. Answered by Dupin. Philip- 
son, that all was done by the Romans. Comp. Friedlieb. 



164 

Jews claim Christ was an imposter, and that the tr'al 
should be judged from their point of view. False claim. 
Peter at Pentecost puts it in proper light — done by '"law- 
less hands,'' (Acts 2: 23), "through ignorance'' (Acts 3 : 
17). Even granting Jewish claim, the trial of Christ 
was neither fair nor legal. 

1. It was prejudged. Since previous Passover, Jews 
"sought to kill him" (John 7 : 1). After raising of Laz- 
arus a formal council and plot to put him to death (John 
11 : 47-53). Did not now design to give him fair trial. 

2. The charge before Pilate not the real ground of 
their persecution. His gathering men for a spiritual 
kingdom would distract attention from resisting the 
Romans, yet they represent to Pilate that he is plotting 
against Caasar (Lk. 23 : 2). Their charge of blasphemy 
(John 19 : 7) founded on an admission forced by High 
Priest during the trial. Peal ground is political jealousy. 
They fear the influence of his doctrines. 

3. It was conducted in haste and in cruelty, (thus 
against their own law). "They spat in his face; they 
smote him with rods; they struck him with closed fists 
and with their open palms." (Farrar.) At same time, 
it was a representative, national act ; jurisdiction belong- 
ed to Sanhedrim. The legal form of obtaining witnesses 
was obeyed. This necessary because of Romans (John 
18:31) and because people were in his favor. The 
chief priests and Sanhedrim " sought false witness." 
When before High Priest, there were no witnesses. 
Christ then appealed to publicity of his ministry and 
demanded witnesses (John 18 r 19-23). They must, 
therefore, obtain true testimony, yet apply it against 
Christ. This is difficult. At last, two bear witness : 
" This fellow said, 'I am able to destroy the temple of 
God and to build it in three days.' " Falsity lay in their 
application — wresting his meaning. Yet not even so 
was their witness^ (Mk. 14:59). Difficult to prove 
Christ claimed to be Messiah. Some say, strange, since 
Christ had publicly claimed Messiahship .and divinity. 
Ans : His mode of teaching was nevertheless enigmati- 
cal. Most take ia/j to mean witnesses not agree (so E. V.) 
Law required at least two (Deut. 17 : 6). Sanhedrim in 
a dilemma: will not acquit, cannot condemn. This 



165 

equivalent to a confession of his innocence. Even this 
semblance of a trial writes their own accusation. Notice 
the facts of his life, miracles, doing good, etc., not denied. 
In charge concerning temple, possibly they thought a 
claim to divinity or threat against temple involved. So 
high priest: "Answerest thou nothing?" " But he held 
his peace.''" Farrar contrasts with trial of Herod before 
Sanhedrim (Jos. Antt. Bk. 14 : 9 : 4). 

Why Christ makes no reply? Before High Priest, in 
private, and before Pilate, a heathen, Christ answers. 
To false witness now, he answers not a word. Strauss 
finds in this silence a myth founded on Is. 53 : 7, "As a 
sheep before her shearers is dumb, etc." Reasons for 
silence : 

1. Their testimony proved nothing, and was confuted 
by their disagreement. 

2. They would not believe, had he answered. 

3. Not his design to be acquitted. A voluntary sacri- 
fice. 

4. Silence thwarts them and brings out his dignity 7 and 
resignation. "They felt before that silence as if they 
were the culprits — he the judge." 

Priests now change plan : would make Christ condemn 
himself — illegal. Excited High Priest stands : "Answer- 
est thou nothing ?" Adjures him, "Art thou the Christ, 
the Son of God ? (Mt. 26': 63) the Son of the Blessed ?" 
(Mk. 14: 61). Does "Son of God " here imply idea of 
divinity — or is it simply a Messianic title? 

In favor of latter view: 1. " Son of God " one of cur- 
rent titles of the Messiah, based on Ps. 2 : 7, not implying 
divinity. Idea of divine nature of Messiah lost among 
Jews. 

2. In his answer Christ puts another Messianic title 
over against this — " Son of man," based on Dan. 7 : 13. 
Held by Meyer and Gess. 

In favor of former : 1. Christ had used it as implying 
divinitv, and they so understood him. (John 5 : 18 ; 10 : 
36.) 

2. This accounts for their rage. Mere claim of Mes- 
siahship does not account for it. Rage because, a, priv- 
ileges to be taken away, and 6, Jesus claimed to be the 
" Son of God." Form of question makes the distinction 
— adjures him " by the living God." 



166 

3. This accounts for charge of blasphemy — not so other 
views. Mt. 26 : 65, 27 : 40, John 19 : 7 show their ground 
of accusation was in this title. 

Christ answers, in this decisive, tragic moment, the 
only time when silence might have saved hi in : " I am, 
and hereafter ye shall see the Son of Man, etc." (Matt. 
26 : 64, lb £c~a;). Corn p. Dan. 7 : 13. Some refer words 
to last judgment. Yet a.-dnzc (from now on) would 
appear to refer to spiritual kingdom. Whatever the 
exegesis, Christ's design appears two-fold: 1. To assert 
his divinity. 2. To warn his enemies. "Jesus simply 
intends to indicate the point of his deepest humiliation 
as the turning point between his redeeming work and that 
of judgment, and to declare that at the very period when 
they thought to destroy him, his true glory would begin." 
(Ebrard.) Note, this the first public assumption of title, 
Messiah. Had before revealed it to woman of Samaria 
(John <± : 26) ; to disciples at Caesarea Philippi (Matt. 16 : 
20); cautions disciples to tell no man. His claim to be 
" Son of God " always aroused violence, e. g. at the feast 
of the Jews (John 5: 17, 18); in Galilee (John 6 : 40, 41); 
at "Dedication (John 10 : 30, 31) ; Jews not sure he is the 
Christ (John 10 : 24). Now first asserted before his 
enemies, when he intends to abide consequences. Culmi- 
nates in a long conflict between him and the priests who 
would have accepted him had he accommodated himself 
to their views of Messiah. Effect: 1. High Priest rent 
his clothes, forbidden by Lev. 10 : 6 and 21 : 10. Farrar 
savs : " But Jewish Halacha considered it lawful in case 
of blasphemy (1 Mace. 11 : 71 ; Jos. B. J. 2 : 15 : 4)." 2. 
All vote him "worthy of death." From Lk. 23 : 51 some 
except Joseph of Arimathea from Council. Say he was 
not called. Probably both he and JSicodemus present. 
Even small minorities may be right. 3. Buffet and mock 
him. They "struck him in the face," "spit in his face," 
"smote him with the palms of their hands, saying Pro- 
phesy, etc." Does this occur twice, or is Lk. parallel 
with Mt. and Mk. ? Ebrard says twice. Robinson, Gres- 
well, say once. Probably parallel : 1. Improbable Luke 
would represent violence occurring in regular court. 
2. Position in narrative explained by contrast of men 
mocking, with Peter weeping bitterly. By whom ? Mt. 






167 

says indefinitely, "they;" Mk. says "some;" Lk., "the 
men that held Jesus." Inference that Sanhedrim did it 
first, and Roman officers or soldiers followed their ex- 
ample. Jews reject this interpretation. Where occur? 
Some say, in prison ; Lange, in guard-room of priest's 
house. These are only guesses. Strauss says mockery 
a myth founded on Is. 53, " bruised for our iniquities, 
etc." 

§146. Morning Meeting of Sanhedrim. (Lk. 22 : 66-71.) 
On Friday 15th Nisan, Wieseler, Lange, Robinson ; 14th 
Nisan, Bleek. Was this an informal consultation, or a 
continuation of night session ? Or was all by daylight, 
or a new meeting very early? In our view a new 7 
meeting for threefold purpose: 1. To convince by- 
standers. 2. The Oral Law ordained trial by daylight, 
Zohar, 56. Farrar : ic And they who could trample on 
all justice and all mercy were yet scrupulous about the 
infinitely little." 

3. To consult how to put him to death. Farrar : 
" His 3d actual but His first formal and legal trial," and 
in a note: — " It is only by courtesy that this body can be 
regarded as a Sanhedrim at all. Jost observes that there 
is in the Romish period no traces of any genuine legal 
Sanhedrim, apart from mere special incompetent gather- 
ings. (See Jos. Ant. XX. 9. §1 ; B. J. IvVo, §4)." The 
question " Art thou the Christ?" and his answers read 
as though referring to a former trial. Then they "bound 
him " and led him Pilate, a transfer from ecclesiastical 
to civil court. Their evidence of his Messianic claim 
established. Strauss retains trial, on charge of over- 
throw of existing institutions, and condemnation for 
claim to be Messiah. Some Jews maintain that as they 
had not power of life and death, responsibility rests on 
Romans. 

§151. Judas hangs himself (Mt. 27 : 3-10, Acts 1 : 18, 
19). Robinson transposes suicide till Christ was given 
up to be crucified. "Till then he had hoped, perhaps, 
to enjoy the reward of his treachery, without involving 
himself in the guilt of his master's blood. Mt. places it 
here. Better to follow order of Evang. till proof to con- 
trary. Introduced as showing by striking example the 
effect of ill-treating Christ ; also brought by Mt. in con- 



168 

trast with repentance of Peter. Another testimony to 
innocence of Christ (Mt. 27 : 4.) Lange, as symbolical 
of the suicide of the nation. Theory that condemnation 
of Christ took Judas by surprise inconsistent with spirit 
of his own confession (v. 4) and every fact of case. 

Casts money in the Holy Place, where he had no right 
to enter — intent to return it to them. Significant that 
blood-money returns to Temple, Christ's body. Differ- 
ences : 1. Mt. says "hanged himself "—Peter (Acts 1 : 
18) "falling headlong, he burst asunder" — not incon- 
sistent if he hanged himself and rope or branch broke. 

2. Mt. says ""priests bought." Peter : " Now this 
man purchased a field." Farrar : "There is in a great 
crime an awful illuminating power. In Judas as in so 
many thousands before and since this opening of the eyes 
which followed the consummation of an awful sin to 
which many other sins have led, drove him from remorse 
to despair, from despair to murder, from murder to 
suicide." Robinson " In Acts 1 : 18 ixnjaaro is to be ren- 
dered : he gave occasion to purchase. Analogous to Mt. 
27: 60; John 3 : 22 ; 4:2, etc." 

§146. (resumed.) Jesus before Pilate. Had Sanhedrim 
the power of life and death ? No. 

1. Distinctly stated in John 18 : 31 and confirmed by 
Talmud (Berachoth f. 58 ; 1 — see Buxtorf Lex. Tal. p. 
514.) 

2. Impossible that the Romans would leave them such 
power. 

3. Accounts best for anxiety to procure Pilate's con- 
sent. 

Dollinger thinks they had this power but could not 
put to death at feast time. Objection : Sanhedrim 
stoned Stephen. This, however, was the tumultuous act 
of a mob. Paul after being tried by Sanhedrim was sent 
to Rome. Two results accomplished by Providence : 
1. Christ's death by crucifixion (John 18: 32.) 2. Par- 
ticipation by Gentiles. 

Pilate was fifth Procurator of Judea which was a hard 
country to govern. Not under Questor, nor was it a 
proconsular or imperial province. Pilate insulted the 
Jews, a. by removing army and images from Csesarea to 
Jerusalem (Jos. Antt. 18: 3, §1.) b. By expending sacred 






160 

money — Corban — on aqueducts (Jos. B. J. 2 : 9, §4). c. 
By setting up in Jerusalem shields dedicated to Tibe- 
rius (Philo. Legat. ad Caium §38). d. By mingling the 
blood of Galileans with their sacrifices (Lk. 13 : 1). Re- 
moved A. D. 36 (Same year as Caiaphas), by Vitellius, 
Legate of Syria, on accusation of Samaritans for haviu^ 
slain many while assembled on Mt. Gerizim (Jos. Antt. 
18 : 4, §§1, 2). Eusebius says, wearied with misfortunes, 
he killed himself. Traditions : 1. Banished to Vienna 
Allobrogum, where there is a pyramid called Pontius 
Pilate's tomb. 2. At Mt. Pilatus by the lake of Lucerne, 
plunged into dismal lake at the summit. (See Smith's 
Diet.) 

Has strong conviction of innocence of Jesus and en- 
deavors to free him. He is impressed by Christ's claim 
to be the Son of God, and by his wife's dream. Pilate 
is perplexed by the Priests accusing, while the people 
are favoring Christ. His great fault is cowardice. He 
acted from policy and not from principle (Chrysosj. 
Collateral evidence in Tacitus Ann. 15 : 44 ; " Per pro- 
curatorem Pontium Pllatum supplicio affectum erat." Also 
know from Justin, Tert., Euseb., that Pilate made report 
to Tiberius (of Christ's trial and condemnation), which 
is lost. " Acta Pilati " now extant, spurious. 

Accusation of Sanhedrim. Still early when they lead 
Christ to the Prsetoriura, which is generally understood 
to be the white marble palace of Herod ; by some (Ewald, 
Meyer, Langej, the tower of Antonia. In John 19: 13, 
.*■ the Pavement," outside of the Prsetorium. Bears on 
direction of Via Dolorosa. Jews did not enter Prsetorium 
lest they should be polluted for Passover. John 18 : 28, 
not proof it was Nisan 14th. So Pilate goes out to them. 
Synoptists give general description. John gives conver- 
sation between Pilate and the Priests, also between Pilate 
and Jesus. Farrar : " The last trial is full of passion and 
movement: it involves a threefold change of scene, a 
threefold accusation, a threefold acquittal by the Romans, 
a threefold rejection by the Jews, a threefold warning to 
Pilate and a threefold effort on his part, made with ever 
increasing energy and ever deepening agitation, to baffle 
the accusers and to set the victim free." 

Pilate and the Priests. First attempt is to obtain as a 
favor crucifixion of Christ. Charge of blasphemy 



170 

against God not sufficient before heathen Pilate, and they 
had no other. " What accusation bring ye ?" If he were 
not a malefactor etc., implies guilty of no ordinary crime. 
Pilate is sarcastic ; u take ye him and judge him." If you 
condemn, you must bear the responsibility. I execute, 
when I judge. Jews say " not lawful for us." Then 
began they to accuse him (Lk. 23 : 2 between John 18 : 
32 and v. 33) of perverting the nation, forbidding tribute, 
and claiming to be king. Notice: 1. Not same charge 
as before Sanhedrim. 2. Charge false in fact. They 
knew Christ taught submission to the government. 3. 
Ignominious, as Priests advocate that for which they con- 
demned Christ. 

Pilate and Jesus go within the Preetorium. Pilate did 
not trust the Jews ; knew they would not condemn 
Christ for treason against the Romans, — endeavors, ac- 
cording to Roman law, to obtain confession of accused. 
Synoptists give affirmation. John fuller : " Art thou a 
king then ?" Could not say " no." Pilate might not 
understand " yes." Reply: *' Sayest thou this of thy- 
self?" Design : Hengsf., Stier, to arouse Pilate's con- 
science. Meyer, Christ demands who is his accuser 
Olsh., Lange, to bring out sense in which Christ put the 
question. Jesus makes clear that his kingdom is not of 
this world. Pilate, " thou art a king then ?" deprecating 
accent on then. Ans : " Thou sayest it . . . every 
one that is of the truth heareth my voice." Pilate's 
famous question, " What is truth ?" Whether in ear- 
nest (Chrysos.), impatient (Parrar), contemptuous 
(Meyer), skeptical, or indifferent, Pilate gives additional 
testimony to the innocence of Christ : " I find in him 
no fault at all." 

Priests enraged make new charges. He stirreth up 
the people, beginning from Galilee (Lk. 23: 5). Pilate 
hearing the word Galilee, eagerly dismisses him to 
Herod. Second effort to release Jesus. 

Objections : 1. Synoptists give Pilate's question to 
Jesus, as if outside; John says in the Praetorium. Ans: 
Synoptists give general account, do not say it was outside. 
No contradiction. 2. How did John know private inter- 
view ? Ans: He was present, or Pilate reported, or 
Jesus stood at the door and all heard, or some prosecutor 



171 

was voluntarily within. Strauss, all an invention of 
John. Baur finds a tendency of Evangelist to throw guilt 
on Jews. 3. The narratives separately unintelligible. Ace. 
to John, Pilate's questions to Jesus before accusation. 
Ans: John assumes possession of Synoptists — also, Pilate 
knew much of Jesus. Whole city in excitement. In 
Synoptists, Jews accuse, Jesus admits and without in- 
vestigation (mentioned by John), Pilate pronounces him 
innocent, John supplements not contradicts. 

§147. Jesus before Herod. (Lk. 23 : 6-12). Priests dis- 
appointed. Pilate sends Christ to Herod : 1. To get rid 
of a troublesome case. 2. To keep from offending the 
priests. Other motives subordinate. Herod Antipas, 
tetrarch of Galilee, was in Jerusalem to keep the Pass- 
over. Receives Jesus with curiosity. A frivolous, un- 
scrupulous, dissolute monarch, sensuous and mercurial 
in character, susceptible of religious impressions, unwill- 
ing to renounce sins. Shows no appreciation of the 
case ; hoped to see a miracle. Had Christ worked one 
miracle here or before Pilate he might have caused his 
release. Reserve of Christ sublime. Herod is disap- 
pointed and sends Jesus back with scorn. Judas, Priests, 
Pilate and Herod all testify to his innocence. He is 
mocked and arrayed in cloak. Color? Xafixp&v— bright. 
If white, means innocence or a candidate for office : if 
red, royalty. Probably red military robe. Shows mock- 
ery. Fulfillment of Ps. 2. (See Acts 4 : 25-27). Herod 
and Pilate made friends. Enmity probably because of 
Galileans slain (Lk. 13 : 1). Where Herod lodged doubt- 
ful ; probably in old Herod Palace, Pilate in the new. 
Objections: 1. Why was Jesus sent back ? Ans: Olsh., 
because birth in Bethlehem was ascertained. More likely, 
could not find ground to condemn him, would not op- 
pose Priests by acquitting, so preferred to return Pilate's 
compliment. 2. Why mentioned b}^ Luke only ? Strauss, 
because it never happened. Ans : Not essential to his- 
tory. No effect except additional humiliation and new 
testimony to innocence. 

§148. Pilate's third effort to release Jesus. (Mt. 27 : 15- 
26; Mk. 15: 6-15; Lk. 23: 13-25; John 18 : 39.40). 
Synoptists full. John two verses. Mt. and Mk. contrast 
Jesus and Bara&oas. Pilate proposes to chastise and re- 



172 

lease him; a compromise between sense of justice and 
fear of insurrection. Not succeeding, proposes to release 
a criminal, according to custom at Passover. People, 
influenced by Priests (Mt. 27 : 20), demand Barabbas. 
Pilate had been warned by misgivings of conscience. 
Now a second solemn warning in the dream of his wife. 
Again urges release ; failing, he yields him to be cruci- 
fied. Notice, Pilate comes out and takes a seat on the 
bench (Mt. 27 : 19) in a place called " Pavement," Gab- 
batha (John 19 : 13). Probably, portable, mosaic pave- 
ment (Caesar carried one) in definite locality Gabbatha. 
Where ? Lightfoot, outer court of Temple, i. e. of Gen- 
tiles. Common opinion — open space before Prsetorium. 
Not secret, examined in their presence; acquits him 
fully. If innocent why punish ? May have thought him 
worthy of some punishment, and wished to please the 
Priests. Now proposes to treat him as guilty — fatal step. 
Expects support of the people to release him but is dis- 
appointed. No custom known of releasing at feast. 
Originated probably with Pilate. Ewald, to commem- 
orate deliverance from Egypt; others, an allusion to 
scape-goat. Not so ; scape-goat referred to Christ. Was 
Barabbas mentioned first by Pilate (Mt. 27 : 17), or by 
people (Lk. 23: 18)? Ans": By Pilate, as Mt. is most 
specific. People choose. Note 1. Barabbas guilty of 
crime charged against Christ. 2. Hypocrisy of Priests 
confessed in choice of Barabbas, a murderer, political 
and social disturber. 3. Christ's purity in strong con- 
trast. 

Barabbas probably a zealot, making insurrection 
against the government. Name — Son of the father. 
Olsh. supposes he was a false Messiah. Syriac version 
reads Jesus — Barabbas, which reading is adopted by 
Tisch., Meyer and Schaff. Accounted for by supposition 
that he was pseudo Messiah ; rejected by Lachm. Treg. 
Popular mind changed ; now demands Barabbas. Mean- 
while comes message from Pilate's wife (Claudia canon- 
ized by Greek Church). A disturbing morning dream 
((jTjjuepov). Some say suggested by God's spirit; others, 
by Devil to avert crucifixion because of consequences. 
Bible does not attribute foreknowledge to Satan. 
Proves Pilate not unimpressible. Pilate remonstrates, 



173 

but is overborne by the tumult. The voice of the peo- 
ple and the ehief priests prevailed. Choice of people 
renders rejection of Christ national. How account for 
change of popular mind towards Jesus? a. People at 
entrance to Jerusalem mostly Ga'ileans, now Jerusalem- 
ites. Inadequate reason as from narrative we infer 
that people as a whole do both. b. Hatred of 
Romans, and unpopularity of Pilate. People side with 
thier own priests, c. Christ now convicted of blasphemy. 
d. Fundamental reason, disappointment of Messianic 
hopes. At Christ's entrance, looked for external king- 
dom. Now humiliated, condemned, mocked. Might 
defend himself by miracles but refuses. His own dis- 
ciples forsook him and fled. While this explains, it is 
no excuse for their conduct. Nothing can wipe away 
the stigma, the great sin of the world by vox populi. 

Why did thev cry " crucify," when this was not a Jew- 
ish mode? J. A. A.: Jesus was substituted for Barab- 
bas, who was to be crucified. It was simply because they 
expected the Romans to perform it. They thus de- 
nationalized themselves. Handwashing by Pilate, given 
only in Mt. 27 : 24. Andrews transposes to John 19 : 15 
(§150). Tisch. and Rob. follow Mt's order. Objected to 
as Jewish practice (Deut. 21 : G-9). Ans : Also heathen 
(vid. Livy 37 : 3, Ov. Fast. II. 45); a natural symbolic 
act, evidence of Pilate's inner convictions. 

Compare words of Judas and Pilate. Judas: " I have 
betrayed the innocent blood." Priests. " See thou to 
that." Pilate: " I am innocent of the blood of this just 
person : see ye to it." Then the terrible imprecation 
by all the people, " His blood be on us and on our 
children." This curse fulfilled in history of Jews to this 
da}-. Strauss says imprecation invented later to account 
for destruction of Jerusalem. Ans : There is no real 
argument against its historical character, for it arises 
naturally in the struggle between Pilate and Priests ; it 
is not needed to account for the destruction of Jerusa- 
lem (this long ago foretold) ; it explains Pilate's readi- 
ness in giving up Christ and releasing Barabbas. 

Pilate proves false to traditionary Roman tolerance in 
religion, and vields Christ on the ground the Jews first 
urge, as a favor. The Hierarchy, Political power and 



174 

the people here combine to condemn the Lord of Glory. 
(Comp. Ps. 2 : 1, 2). Some say scape-goat typified Barab- 
bas. But Barabbas bears away no sin. Both goats typify 
Christ. Skeptics throw away historical accuracy of trial. 
§149. Jesus delivered up, scourged and mocked. (Mt. 27 : 
26-30; Mk. 15 : 15-19; John 19: 1-3.) Lk. alone men- 
tions abuse from Herod. Mt. and Mk. allude to scourging 
as part of usual process before crucifixion ; John as though 
Pilate wished to excite compassion or contempt and pro- 
cure his release. That this was purpose of Pilate, see Lk. 
23: 16-23. Mauyhold Christ was twice scourged. Im- 
probable that Pilate would allow to be repeated this 
cruelty so dangerous to life. Soldiers were employed, 
and not lictors, as Pilate was a sub-governor, and not 
Proconsul. The word used ((ppaysAAcoao^) implies that it 
was done not with rods but with the flagellum. Farrar : 
" It was a punishment so hideous that, under its lacerat- 
ing agony, the victim generally fainted, often went away to 
perish under the mortification and nervous exhaustion 
which ensued." Why such malignity of Roman troops ? 
Sharing the hatred against the Jews, inflamed by popular 
clamor and by contrast of claims and humble appearance 
of Christ, they are rude enough to enjoy this brutal sport 
as a break in the dull monotony of their life. The pub- 
licity is noticed ; oneipav, technically, cohort, is the whole 
band (armed by Pilate for fear of tumult). Scourged in 
the Prsetorium, enclosed court of the Palace. Then 
mock him as king, putting on him a scarlet (Mt.), or 
purple (Mk.) soldier's cloak ; on his head the painful 
crown of thorns; in his hand a reed. Did Christ grasp 
the reed with his hand? Slight importance. Probably 
hands bound. They soon " took the reed and smote him 
on the head," and then paid mock homage. Why all 
this indignity allowed ? 1. Exhibits the evil of sin ; 
human cruelty exhausting itself against a Savior. Never- 
theless " by his stripes we are healed." 2. Shows Gentiles 
voluntarily participated in rejecting Christ. Brings out 
character of Jesus — his sublime forbearance, his super- 
human dignity. A mere man could not have borne it. 
All this quietly wiped out by skeptics. Strauss concedes 
the scourging may have been performed. 



175 

§150. Pilate still seeks to release Jesus. Ecce Hmno. J no. 
19 : 4-16.) Given by John alone. Some take this 
section with §148. Confusing, and forbidden by fact 
that this is after scourging. Pilate tries to excite pity or 
contempt by leading Christ out in humiliated appear- 
ance, and says " Behold the Man !" An arch on Via 
Dolorosa marks the scene. Doubtful. Effect is only to 
call out new rage — " Crucify him, crucify him." Meyer 
insists that the populace is not mentioned in whole sec- 
tion. Some say, because priests were afraid of vacillating 
populace. Most, priests mentioned as being leaders. 
Jews fear Pilate will insist on releasing Christ, when he 
says ironically, " take ye him and crucify him, etc." So 
they now introduce the charge of blasphemy : "We have 
a law, and by our law be ought to die, because he made 
himself the Son of God.*' Effect on Pilate extraordinary 
— hears it for first time. Superstitious and afraid before, 
he now associates this claim of divinity with his notions 
of demigods, and is more afraid. Leads Christ back to 
Praetorium, and in tones of deepest agitation asks: 
"Whence art thou?" Contrast spirit of question with 
that in previous chapter. Jesus now silent. Pilate 
threatens. Jesus answers: "Thou couldest have no 
power, etc., . . . therefore he that delivered, etc." John 
ll): 11-12. Why therefore? Not because lesser guilt 
rests on weakness and timidity of Pilate (Luther), but 
because Jews illegal and willing persecutors, while Pilate 
with less knowledge is the unwilling though rightful 
judge. Farrar : "Thus with infinite dignity, and yet 
with infinite tenderness, did Jesus judge his judge. 7 '* 
Pilate felt it, and on that (E. V. "from thenceforth,") 
determined to release him. If ever a prisoner had a 
chance to be released by his judge, Christ had now. This 
is the crisis of the trial. Jews threaten, "If thou let this 
man go, thou art not Caesar's friend." Pilate knows the 
jealous severity of Tiberias towards subordinates, and 
remembering his own former cruelties, now yields to the 
threat. He brought Jesus forth and sat down on the 
judgment seat, and said in scorn, " Behold your king!" 
They cry, " Crucify." Pilate : " Shall I crucify your 
king?" They answer: "We have no king but Caesar." 
This is the lowest point in their hypocrisy. They claim 



176 

loyalty to Caesar and thus renounce all expectation of the 
Messiah. This ends the trial. Xotice Pilate has made 
six efforts to release Christ. 1. Told priests and people, 
" I find no fault in this man." 2. Sends him to Herod. 
3. On return from Herod, "I will therefore chastise him 
and release him." 4. Appealed to the people to release 
Christ rather than Barabbas. 5. After scourging, said, 
"Behold the man !" 6. After claim of " Son of God " 
made known. 

§151. See §146. • 

§152. Jesus led away to be crucified. (Mt. 27: 31-34; 
Mk. 15: 20-23; Lk. 23 : 26-33; John 19 : 16, 17.) 

I. Time of Crucifixion: Important discrepancy between 
John and Syn. Alexander: Impossible there should be 
a mistake in so public a transaction. Mk. 15 : 25 says, 
" it was the third hour (9 a. m.), and they crucified him." 
This agrees with M.M.L. that there was darkness from 
sixth to ninth hour, and with time required for trials. 
John 19 : 14, "And it was the preparation of the Passo- 
ver and about the sixth hour (noon); and he saith unto 
the Jews, Behold your king !" Various attempts to 
remove the difficulty (see Andrews). 1. John's reading 
an error of transcription, zplzrj instead of exrrj sup- 
ported by I). L. X., Euseb., Theophyl., Robinson, Far- 
rar. But best text is sxtv. So A. B. E. X. etc. 2. 
That John uses Roman reckoning from midnight. There- 
fore 6 a. m. So Tholuck, Olsh., Ewald, Wieseler. But 
John does not reckon in this way plsewhere, and 6 A. 
M. would be too early. Too short time for trial, too long 
between condemnation and crucifixion. 3. That prepara- 
tion denotes not whole day but part immediately preceding 
Sabbath from 3—6 p. m. Thus 6th hour before prepa- 
ration would be 9 a. m. 4. That w t oa is division of day 
— 3 hours. " Thus 1st hour of day was from 6 — 9 ; the 
3d from 9—12; the 6th from 12—3, the 9th from 6—9 
(Andrews). The 3d hour of Mk. was from 9—12. Dur- 
ing this period Jesus was crucified. John refers to end of 
period as 6th hour. So Grotius, Calvin, Wetstein, but 
unsupported by usage. 5. Hofmann and Lichtenstein 
put comma after TTapaaxsuiq, and read 6th hour of the 
Passover ; counting from midnight, which brings us to 
6 a. m. But feast began at 6 a. m. not at midnight. 



177 

6. That ; ' about the sixth hour" taken in loose sense, 
would be after 9 and before 12. So Andrews and Elli- 
cot. Norton translates, " towards noon." 7. Lange 
(best) that the two writers date according to different 
idea. Mark may date from before scourging because of 
significant antithesis he wishes to institute between 3d 
and 6th hour. John says " towards noon," because the 
second, more Sabbatic half of rzapaaxeun was approach- 
ing. (See Lange on John 19 : 14.) An}- one of these 
solutions is more probable than to say none possible. 

II. Place of Crucifixion: Mt., Mk. and John give the 
name Golgotha (Aramaic), translated xoavioo totto^ ; Cal- 
variae locus (Vnlg.), " place of a skull " (E. V.). Lk. 23 : 
36. Lk. gives xpaviov, only place translated ' ; Calvary." 
Supposed by Jerome to be so called from uncovered or 
untuned skulls ; others, that it was a place of execution. 
But " Skull " is in the singular not plural, and Joseph, 
a rich man, would not have a tomb in such a place. 
Common explanation is that the name arose from conical 
shape of the hillock or rock. Mount Calvary is a modern 
expression. 1. Place was outside city walls. (Heb. 13 : 
12, Mt. 28 : 11, (John 19 : 16, 17.) 2. It was near the city. 
(John 19 : 20). 3. It was near the sepulchre, which was in 
a garden and hewn in a rock. John 19 : 41. Fisher 
Howe adds a. it was near one of the leading thorough- 
fares (Mt. 27 : 39) ; b. it was eminently conspicuous (Mk. 
15 : 40 ; Lk. 23 : 49). Andrews ; " If the trial of our 
Lord was at the palace of Herod on Mt. Sion, he could 
not have passed along the Yia Dolorosa." Church of 
Holy Sepulchre is the traditional site, supported by Wil- 
liams, Tisch., Lange, etc., and opposed by Robinson, Wil- 
son and others. The main difficulty lies in settling the 
course of the second wall — a question of time and money. 
Eusebius says Helena (mother of Constantine) built a 
church over the site. Fergusson, on architectural and 
other grounds, says that Mosque of Omar marks the true 
site of the sepulchre. (See Smith's Diet. art. Jerusa- 
lem.) Answered conclusively in Ed. Review and Bib. 
Sacra. Yet architectural argument against traditional 
site, is strong. 

III. Significance of Crucifixion : Why this mode of 
death ? Crucifixion known to Grecians, Romans, Egypt- 



178 

tians, Parthians, Phoenicians, Indians ; not used by Jews. 
Significant that his death was in a mode familiar to whole 
heathen world for lowest criminals. Josephus says : 
" Titus could not find wood enough to make crosses or 
places to put them when he took Jerusalem." Cicero 
(Verr. 5 : 64) speaks of it as a cruel and terrible punish- 
ment, such as was not inflicted on Roman citizens. Be- 
fore Christ, to bear the cross was a classic phrase express- 
ing dishonor. This mode of punishment was abolished 
by Constantine, through reverence for the cross. Un- 
known to Jews, except after death the body was some- 
times hanged (Deut. 21 : 22, 23), as special curse (Num. 
25 : 4 ; 2 Sam. 21 : 6). Controversial Jews do not use 
the phrase crucify ; these say they hanged him. Yet 
crucifixion was predicted : Christ to be pierced (Ps. 22 : 
16 ; Zech. 12 : 10). Also the scourging, the drink, and 
the parting of the garments belong to this mode. The 
same dishonor associated with Jewish hanging (Deut. 21 : 
23) inflicted on Christ (Gal. 3 : 13). 

From the Crucifixion we learn : 1. Judicial nature of 
his death. He paid the supreme penalty to rescue us 
from the curse of the law. 2. He died for the whole 
world. Jewish Messiah died by Roman punishment, 
that " the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gen- 
tiles," (Gal. 3: 14). So he declared; "And I, if I be 
lifted up, etc.," (John 12 : 33). 3. His death was conspic- 
uous. Lifted up as brazen serpent, an object for faith of 
all. 4. It was ignominious and painful. This shows 
the nature of sin. See Plato's portrait of the just man 
(Republic, II. 362), " He shall be scourged . . . and cru- 
cified." Clem. Alex, says Plato speaks like a prophet ; 
Lightfoot, that only chronological impossibility saves him 
from imputation of plagiarism. 5. It was a lingering 
death. We have three years with the living Christ ; 
this gives three hours intercourse with the dying Christ, 
6. It was fully attested : not done in a corner. No 
rationalist can deny the fact. 

'No wonder death of Christ transformed the cross to 
symbol of highest glory. Chrysostom says: "Symbol 
seen everywhere, for we are not ashamed of the cross." 
In decline of the church it became an object of worship. 

IV. The Form of the Cross, etc. There were three 
ancient forms in use : a. the crux decussata in shape of 



179 

letter X (St. Andrew's); b. the crux commissa, in shape of 
letter T; c. the crux immissa, with upright one-third of 
its length above the transverse f (Roman). Origen says 
like T. So Tertullian, who argued from the mark like 
a cross placed on forehead (Ez. 9 : 4). Same form on 
coins of Constantine, commonly supposed to be Roman 
crux immissa. So gathered from comparisons of Justin, 
Jerome, etc., to man praying with outstretched arms, to 
four quarters of heavens. So in catacombs and early 
paintings. So writing nailed above his head. 

The cross (not a tree) was probably made of sycamore 
or olive. Artists make it too high or too heavy. The 
feet would come quite near the ground. The hyssop 
was only an herb, and the sponge on a hyssop branch 
reached his mouth. The thrust from a spear was there- 
fore nearly horizontal. Cross was light enough to be car- 
ried by one man. 

" And when they had mocked him, they took 
off the purple from him and led him out to crucify 
him," (Mk. 15 : 20). Crown of thorns not mentioned; 
probably removed. Roman law that condemned should 
be immediately executed ; important to priests as well 
as against their law that body should remain out all 
night (Deut. 21 : 23). They proceed immediately to 
crucify. A quaternion of soldiers, and not lictors, as 
Pilate was only sub-governor. The centurion was usually 
mounted. Xot told how far customs were observed. 
Roman custom, a tablet huug around neck or carried be- 
fore criminal. Jewish custom, a herald crying his name 
and crime. Roman usage made condemned bear his 
cross. John 19 : 17 says Jesus bore his cross ; Syns., they 
compelled Simon, a Cyrenian. This probably when 
Jesus became faint. Perhaps both together (see Lange 
on Lkl 23 : 26). Meyer supposes him a slave; some say 
he w r as seized because a disciple ; probably because he was 
near. Cyrene is in Libya. There a colony of Jews ; 
many in Jerusalem (Acts 2 : 10). Simon Niger and 
Lucius, prophets or teachers, were from Cyrene (Acts 
13 : 1). From fact that he was "coming from the coun- 
try," no inference that this was a working and not a great 
feast day. Multitudes of people and women followed 
lamenting. Not the usual lamentation for dead, 



180 

which, at least according to later traditions, was forbid- 
den for criminals. Some say, they were his Galilean 
friends. This does not agree with " Daughters of Jeru- 
salem." Some say, from mere pity. Yet Christ deems 
them worthy of a particular address. Christ's reply, like 
his lamentation over Jerusalem, alludes to prophecies 
fulfilled. (Is. 54: 1; Hos. 10:8; Ez. 20 : 47, comp. 
21 : 3 seq.) These his last words of any length. Jo- 
sephus gives a dire comment when he tells of women 
eating their children during the siege. No instance in 
gospels of women doing or saying anything against 
Christ. Arrived at Golgotha, they proceed to crucify. 
Wine mingled with myrrh offered to deaden pain. Far- 
rar : " It had been the custom of wealthy ladies in Jeru- 
salem to provide this stupefying potion at their own 
expense, and they did so quite irrespectively of their 
sympathy for any individual criminal." No analogous 
custom at Rome. Mt. says "vinegar mingled with gall." 
Mk., "wine mingled with myrrh." No contradiction. 
Soldiers carried a light acid wine (Mt. 27 : 34). This was 
mingled with #0/^, i. e., anything bitter. Our Lord re- 
fuses ; an act of sublimest heroism. Not his purpose to 
avoid suffering. 

§153. The Crucifixion. (Mt. 27:35-38; Mk. 15 : 24- 
28 ; Lk. 23 : 33, 34, 38 ; John. 19 : 18-24). Mt. and Mk. 
speak of dividing garments too soon. Was he condemned 
and affixed to cross before or after its elevation ? Com- 
monly after; so early fathers. About centre of cross a 
sedile to support weight of body. Binding to cross essen- 
tial to prevent tearing. Disputed whether the feet were 
nailed separately or together. Most fathers say nailed 
separately. Because Christ walked afterwards, Ration- 
alists say feet simply bound, hence Christ did not die, 
only swooned. Justin and Fathers say Ps. 22 : 16 fulfil- 
led, and cite Lk. 24: 39: "Behold my hands and my 
feet." Two malefactors, robbers, were crucified with 
Christ. Was this caused by the Jews to degrade Christ, 
or by Pilate to insult the Jews? Probably the latter. 
Is. 53 : 12 fulfilled. Mk. 15 : 28 omitted by A, B, C, D, 
X, Tisch., Alf., etc. 

The Seven Utterances. Luke only (23 : 34) gives first 
utterance, "Father forgive them." No limitation in 



181 

truth implied. Universal, hence appropriate in Luke. 
Conjectured that these words were uttered during nail- 
ing. They signify : 1. Intercession of Christ as Priest, 
a sacrificial act. 2. The state of mind of Christ in midst 
of suffering. 3. The spirit of his teaching, " Love your 
enemies." Fruits of this prayer at Pentecost. Comp. 
Stephen's last words. 

Parting of garments. Custom to divide garments among 
executioners. Condemned was stripped naked, not even 
cloth about the loins. Divided upper garment into four 
parts. Cast lots for his coat. Priest's tunic seamless. 
Must not infer Christ's coat a priest's. Prophec}' fulfil- 
led (Is. 53 : 12). Mt. 25 : end of v. 35 an interpolation. 

Title over Cross. Mt., " This is Jesus the king of the 
Jews." Mk., li The king of the Jews." Lk., " This is 
the king of the Jews." John, "Jesus of Nazareth, the 
king of the Jews." Notice differences: 1. John full, 
others compress. 2. Three languages used. This might 
account for differences. Farrar : " Title written in the 
official Latin, in the current Greek, in the vernacular 
Aramaic." 

Why did Pilate write this superscription? Ans : a. 
To make a show of legality, b. To ridicule the Jews. 
This last strongest, and proved by remonstrance of the 
priests, " Write not, The king of the Jews; but that he 
said, I am king of the Jews." What Pilate had written 
in scorn was in reality a profound truth. Pilate had 
vacillated in serious matters, now obstinate in small. 
Lange insists (from Mt. 27 : 38) that the thieves were 
brought on by a different guard of troops, after the title 
was set up. Mt.'s use of tots not strongly temporal. 

§154. Jews mock at Jesus on the cross. Me commends his 
mother to John. (Mt. 27 : 39-44 ; Mk. 15 : 29-32 ; Lk. 23 : 
35-37, 39-43; John 19 : 25-27.) Four classes participate 
in mocking: 

I. The passers by. (Mt. and Mk.) Not only the cas- 
ual passers, but the crowd railed at him, wagging their 
heads. Fulfillment of Ps. 22 : 7. Words of mockery : 
" Thou that destroyest the temple, etc.," significant as 
now being fulfilled. 

II. Chief Priests, Scribes and Elders (Sanhedrim) mock 
his official character. (MML.) They 'sneer (literally 



182 

turn up the nose) at meaning of Jesus. " He saved 
others, himself he cannot save." They mock also his 
trust in God. Ps. 22 : 8. They unconsciously express 
the profound truth that the salvation of others implies 
sacrifice of self. 

III. The soldiers mock, saying, " If thou be the King 
of the Jews, save thyself." It was near noon, their dinner 
hour. They offer him vinegar (Lk.) i. e. their light acid 
wine. Some identify this with previous offering ; others 
with offering just before his death. Ebrard : "A distinc- 
tion is very properly made between (1) the myrrh offered 
in order to stupefy; (2) the tantalizing offer of the posca 
in Lk. 24 : 36 ; and (3) the offer of the posca immediately 
before the death of Jesus." 

IY. The two thieves railed on him, saying "If thou be 
the Christ, save thyself and ?is." Notice, each class of 
scoffers brings out specific difference between Christ and 
themselves. All involve the false idea of the Messiah 
and his kingdom. Strauss objects to the differences 
in the accounts, and that priests could not quote Ps. 
22:8,9 without acknowledging themselves enemies of 
the Messiah. Ans : Proves too much. Strauss admits 
many facts which were clearly predicted; this Psalm was 
Messianic, and so naturally used. 

Conversion of thief. Word implies violence rather 
than theft. Substitution represented — "He was num- 
bered with the transgressors." Cross of Christ discrim- 
inates among men — election represented. Christ shown 
as Prophet in words to penitent thief; as Priest, in offer- 
ing up himself; as King, in pardoning. True repentance 
at eleventh hour represented. Abuse of the example 
removed by example of the other thief. 

Second Utterance : " To-day thou shalt be with me in 
Paradise." Paradise used three times in ~N. T. Decisive 
against Purgatory, not necessarily against an intermedi- 
ate state of the dead. Still a question where Christ was 
during three days. This utterance predicts Christ's 
death on this day. Speedy death unusual. Objections: 
1. Mt. and Mk. say both reviled; Lk. says one. Ans : 
M.M. speak generically, or (better) both mocked, then 
one repented. 



183 

Third Utterance: "Woman, behold thy son !" "Behold 
thy mother !" Women at the cross, his mother and his 
mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary 
Magdalene. This utterance shows Christ's human love 
for his mother and confidence in bis friends. Shows his 
grasp of the future of his people, and that he makes pro- 
vision for them. Objected that M.M. speak only of 
women, Lk. of his acquaintance, and only Johu of him- 
self and Mary. No contradiction. Objected that John 
says they stood by the cross, while Synoptists sa} 7 afar 
off. The Synoptists refer to later period. This utterance 
Andrews supposes before, Krafft after, the darkness and 
final mocking — unimportant. Gospels show that Mary 
laid up these things and pondered them in her heart. It 
may be her influence is seen in John's gospel. 

§155. Darkness. Death of Jesus. (Mt. 27 : 45-50 ; Mk. 
15 : 33-37 ; Lk. 23 : 44-46 ; John 19 : 28-30.) A new 
element in supernatural accompaniments, darkness, 
earthquake, rending of veil, and opening of graves. 
These are divine attestations to Christ, and symbols of 
the effect of his death. Would have been unnatural and 
out of analogy had no signs been given now. Darkness 
from sixth to ninth hour. How long Jesus had hung 
upon the cross depends on harmony of Mt. 15 : 25 with 
John 19 : 14. It was high noon, when light and heat 
greatest, that sun was darkened. Meyer says that Luke 
implies sun partially obscured till noon, then darkened. 
Substantiated by Cod. Sin., which supplies in v. 44, rou 
■fjAcoo IxhnbvTOz. 

Extent of Darkness : Was it confined to Palestine, or 
more extended ? If the former, explains lack of mention 
by contemporaries. Cause of darkness. Many fathers 
say eclipse. Phlegon of Tralles says in 202 Olympiad 
occurred greatest eclipse ever known. But this eclipse 
was a year or two too late, and could not occur during 
full moon. Seyffarth holds to eclipse, and supposes the 
Passover two weeks after regular time. Some connect 
darkness with earthquake. Majority say it was entirely 
miraculous. 

Objections: 1. John omits all supernatural additions. 
2. No adequate cause for them. 3. Not mentioned in his- 
tory. 4. Not appealed to by Apostles. 5. Motive for 



184 

mythical origin obvious. Ans : 1. Friedlieb quotes Ter- 
tullian and Lucian as saying that the fact was recorded 
in heathen accounts now lost. 2. Apostles refer to Resur- 
rection as proof of supernatural, and greater includes the 
less. If no other proof, authority of the three Evangelists 
sufficient. The darkness symbolizes sympathy of nature. 
The earth cursed because of man's sin now participates 
in redemption. Corresponds also with darkness in soul 
of Jesus. At his birth a new star came forth ; at his 
death the sun was darkened. 

Fourth Utterance : " My God, my God, why hast thou 
forsaken me ?" Some say after darkness, because drink 
offered; others, just before. This the only one of the 
seven utterances preserved by M.M. Mt. gives Hebrew, 
Mk. the Aramaic. Meaning of this utterance : It expres- 
ses a reality. God had realty forsaken him. His human 
soul is left destitute. Expresses the extremity of what 
he came to bear. Lange, sympathy of soul with body ; 
Meyer, physical pain. Naturalistic interpreters deny 
importance of the words. Others, little stress on mere 
words, as they are simply the opening words of a Psalm 
of triumph (Ps. 22). Others, an ordinary ejaculation of 
distress. Others, failure of his plan. Others, mythical. 
Bystanders say, " Behold he calleth Elias." Olshausen, 
Lange, that terrified and confused, they think judgment 
and Elijah truly coming. Most say, it was a wilful mis- 
understanding. 

Fifth Utterance: "I thirst." Was this to fulfil proph- 
ecy (Ps. 69:21), or a real want? When he used the 
language " I thirst," he meant it. Meyer : 1. John never 
puts telic clause first. 2. Ps. 69 : 21 refers to previous 
offer of vinegar. 3. Christ would not now say "I thirst," 
if not true. (See Meyer on John 19 : 28.) This the only 
word from the cross expressing physical suffering. Geth- 
semane shows spiritual suffering not to be lost sight of; 
this shows the same in regard to the physical. One ran 
and filled a sponge with vinegar and gave him to drink. 
Having satisfied this compassionate impulse, he joins the 
rest in mockery : " Let alone ; let us see whether Elias 
will come to take him down." Last words somewhat 
differently reported. Mt. and Mk. say he cried with a 
loud voice, and gave up the ghost. But word for voice 
{(fcovyj) means articulate utterance. 






185 

Sixth Utterance: "It is finished," given by John. To 
be taken before utterance given by Luke, because more 
appropriate and intelligible here. Evident reference to 
v. 28. Perfect tense ; it has been and continues finished. 
All O. T. prophecies and types fulfilled. He does not 
mean simply the scripture has been fulfilled. The words 
go back to the counsels- of eternity. Redemption, and 
Revelation of God toman are finished. Comp. John 17: 
4. Hengst. finds reference to Rs. 22 : 31. Finished is his 
farewell greeting to earth ; the next utterance marks his 
entrance to heaven. 

Seventh Utterance: "Father, into thy hands I commend 
my spirit." (Lk. 23 : 46.) Tisch. reads TiapaTcde/mc. This 
more natural. His last words not an assertion of divin- 
ity but trust. He resigns himself to his Father. Taken 
from Ps. 31 : 5. 

These seven utterances have a literature of their own. 
Notice, 1. how many come from O. T.; 2. how wonderful 
their comprehensiveness; 3. how natural their sequence. 
He who exhausts them has little to know about either 
covenant. 

The first is a prayer for pardon of his enemies. 

Second, Shows judgment and saving power. 

Third, Christ's tender care for his people. 

Fourth, Depth of punishment for sin. 

Fifth, His humanity and physical suffering. 

Sixth, His triumphant victory. 

Seventh, His trust in God. 

It is remarkable that the four Evangelists avoid the 
expression, "he died." They say. "He gave up the ghost." 
It was a voluntary act. 

§156. Supernatural accompaniments continued. Imjoression 
on different classes of witnesses. (Mt. 27 : 51-56 ; Mk. 15 : 
38-41;' Lk. 23:45, 47-49.) The veil of temple rent, 
earthquake, graves opened and dead raised. Luke puts 
rending of veil before statement of Christ's death. The 
same word used in LXX. for both inner and outer veil. 
Means here, inner veil. Denied, because 1. known only 
to priests, who would not tell, and 2. not referred to later 
in N. T. Naturalistic interpreters describe it as effect 
of earthquake upon veil old or tender or fastened at four 
corners. Tradition in Gospel of the Hebrews says a beam 



186 

fell against it. Its meaning is plain. The typical system 
is ended. All believers are now priests and may enter 
through the Veil to the Holiest of Holies (Heb. 10 : 19). 
Earthquake and grave-opening mentioned by Mt. alone. 
Objected 1. That this resurrection of saints was never 
appealed to later. 2. What became of them ? 3. What 
was the use of it? Some try to destroy the text. Some 
say earthquake opened graves, which were found empty, 
hence the report. (Farrar.) Others, it was all visionary. 
Strauss, all mythical ; they had not yet separated second 
advent from first. Do the words "after his resurrection" 
qualifj^ their leaving the graves or their going into the 
city? Most place all after his resurrection, because 1. 
Christ is called the first-fruits, and 2. His resurrection 
necessary to new life of the saints. How did they rise ? 
Was it in physical bodies to die again ? Most likely in 
resurrection bodies — recognizable — not to live with 
men, but to ascend with Christ. Who were they ? Some 
say those recently dead, or they would not have been 
recognized. Others say 0. T. Patriarchs and prophets. 
Tradition gives their names. Meaning clear : The sacri- 
fice now made is victory over death. Schafif: "So much 
only appears certain to us that it was a supernatural and 
symbolic event which proclaimed the truth that the death 
and resurrection of Christ was a victory over death and 
Hades, and opened the door to everlasting life." The 
centurion and soldiers, after Christ's last cry (Mk.), and 
the supernatural accompaniments (Mt.) say " Truly this 
was the Son of God." Luke gives, "certainly this was 
a righteous man." Some say the words must be taken 
in heathen sense, i. e. a demi-god (So Meyer). More 
common opinion is that the centurion had some knowl- 
edge and this is incipient faith. At all events he is con- 
vinced that Christ is true. He is the precursor of Cor- 
nelius, the first fruits of Gentiles acknowledging the 
Savior. We have important witness to truth of these 
details. The mass of the people are impressed. Stricken 
with terror and remorse, they smote their breasts, and 
returned (Lk. 23 : 48). Representatives of Israel and 
the Centurion of the Gentiles are witnesses to the fact 
and power of his death. The friends of Christ are also 
present. Lk. says " all his acquaintance." Mt. and Mk. 



187 

specify names of some of the women. By these friends 
the knowledge of his teaching is preserved and handed 
down. All classes are witnesses. 

§157. Taking down from the Cross and Burial. Two 
striking fulfillments of prophecy seen in a departure both 
from Roman and Jewish usage. The Roman custom 
was to leave the bodies hanging until devoured by birds. 
Jews of course did not. (Deut. 21 : 23). And the Sab- 
bath was an "High Day:" Bleek: "High Day" be- 
cause the first day of the Feast, or Nisan 15. But if it 
were the second or 16th of Nisan, the day on which 
the offerings were brought to the Temple — and from 
which Pentecost was reckoned, it would also be an 
"High Day" 

Did the Jews know that Jesus had died? Not told. 
If they did, the request was for the thieves. This break- 
ing of the legs was for torture. It was only the usual 
adjunct of Crucifixion. There is no evidence that this was 
the " mere} 7 stroke," for more merciful means were in use ; 
as the stab, &c. It seems to have been rather for ad- 
ditional torture and ignominy. Possibly they had in 
mind, the prophecy implied in Exod. 12 : 46 — " Neither 
shall ye break a bone thereof" — and wished to disprove 
thereby his Messiahship. Some argue from John 19: 
32 that a new bod} T of soldiers were employed in this. 
But the message was sufficient. They broke the legs of 
the two thieves first ; probably because on the outside. 
One of the soldiers thrust a lance into the side of Jesus, 
to make sure of his actual death. It was an easier and 
more certain mode than the breaking of his legs. As 
already dead, there was no need of torture. . Thus were 
these soldiers witnesses of the reality of his death. 

It has been argued against John's recording this inci- 
dent, that " no one doubted Christ's death in his day." 
Ans : 1. Even if true, the fact of his death is so im- 
portant that John would not omit it. And the Corin- 
thians did deny his real death already. Its bearing in 
our own day is obvious. 2. It proves the reality of the 
body of Christ against the Docetse. John himself says 
he did it to confirm the faith of his readers : a. Neither 
shall ye break a bone thereof." Ex. 12 : 46. Ps. 34 : 
30. b. " They shall look on him whom they have 



188 

pierced." Zecb. 12 : 10. The main fact is the lance- 
thrust ; the flow of blood and water is secondary and 
confirmatory, therefore not miraculous. No symbolical 
meaning dwelt on but (I. John 5 : 6) itself a symbol of 
the atoning and cleansing power of Christ's blood. 
Rationalists who deny the reality of his death deny the 
spear-thrust, or pronounce it superficial. This is contrary 
to the words themselves — to the intention and to the 
invitation to Thomas — John 20 : 27. It was probably 
the left side, as that was surer death, and it accounts for 
the blood and water. The thrust nearly horizontal and 
but slightly inclined upward. The nature of this flow 
is included in the wider question — what was the physical 
cause of his death ? 

1. Miraculous Theory, held by the Reformers, Fathers, 
Meyer, &c. If his death was miraculous, so was proba- 
bly the flow of blood and water. The natural arguments 
are a. his speedy death ; his strength of body and mind 
to the end; the expectation of the Jews that he would 
linger. Pilate's surprise at the report of his death, b. 
The terms ernploj'ed : " He gave up the spirit." c. 
The words of Jesus : John 19 : 11 and 10 : 18. d. Argu- 
ment from the divine nature. Also the frequent N. T. 
expression " he died for us." The Jews slew him, which 
would not be true if he died from natural causes. 

2. The spear thrust — the cause of his death. Founded 
on a reading of Mt. 27 : 49; supported by B. C. L. and 
Cod. Sin. But it is an interpolation and contradicts 
John Grliner's view. His heart was pierced before death. 
The water was from the pericardium. Debility and 
anxiety produced effusion before his death. Ans : 
The physiological facts are disputed, and the narrative 
plainly implies death before the lance-thrust. 

3. Weakness. To the objection that it was too sudden, 
they answer: The perfection of his organization, or 
mental anguish. What then of the blood and water ? 
a. If the heart was pierced, there would be no flow from 
it. b. Extravasations, c. The Bertholines argue a bloody 
serum in the cavity of the chest. Fact is disputed 
physiologically : and that is not blood and water, d. 
Lange's idea is that his transformation had begun, e. 
His death was natural but the blood and water was 
miraculous. 



189 

4. Stroud's theory. He died from a rapture of the ven- 
tricle of the heart produced by mental agony. Blood 
separated in the thorax. There was time enough and 
this is analogous to the bloody sweat in Gethsemane. 
Objection : The blood would be coagulated. A coinci- 
dence of his death and the knowledge on the part of 
Jesus when the time came. But he may have spoken 
after the rupture took place, or he may have been 
warned by an increase of suffering. A difficulty here is 
met in the words of the Psalmist. Ps. 16 : 10 in connec- 
tion with St. Peter's assertion in Acts 2 : 31 : " Xeither 
his flesh did see corruption.** Does the separation of the 
blood imply this ? Meyer says John intends to describe 
it as miraculous. But compare the exegesis above. This 
view an elevated one. But it subjects physical to moral 
causes. If Christ's life was subject to physical causes, 
so by analogy should be his death. It is impossible to 
decide absolutely. Comp. Baur, Strauss, Hanna. An- 
drews. Sir J. Simpson and Pseudo-John. 

The, Burial The history of the burial, shows a series 
of providences to adduce witnesses to the identity of the 
body in the interval before Resurrection. 

He was laid in a new tomb. Joseph of Arimathea asks 
for the body. John alone mentions Xicodemus as tak- 
ing part, as he alone mentions him before. " It was in 
the power of governors of provinces to grant private 
burial to criminals at the request of friends: and it 
was usually done, except they were mean or infamous. 
But for Joseph, Christ would probably have been buried 
with the malefactors. I>e Wette argues that verses 38 and 
31 are inconsistent. If Joseph came u-za toutcl and 
outaz — late in afternoon, a. how could Pilate be surprised 
that he was already dead ? and b. how could Joseph go 
to Pilate before the body was taken down by the 
soldiers *? Liicke says do-q means to take away to burial. 
But Svn. sav Joseph and Xicoderaus took him down from 
the cross. Lk. 23 : 53. Mk. 15 : 46. Friedlieh says 
Joseph asked before the Jews — but Pilate waited to hear 
from the Centurion. This disregards usra zairca. Meyer 
— Jews' request was first. Then the trouble is to find 
time for Joseph to act. But soldiers would wait till the 
malefactors' death before taking them down. Or Joseph 



190 

may have followed the Jews very quickly. Very little 
time was necessary. The tombs of rich families were 
generally in a rock, hewn with the mouth so as to go 
in horizontally. By this interment in the new tomb of 
Joseph of Arimathea was brought about, not only the 
fulfillment of prophecy, but also a proof of his resurrec- 
tion. No other had been buried there, hence, no other 
could rise from that tomb. As early as Jerome was this 
fact noticed as important, He compares it to the pure 
womb of the Virgin Mary. 

2. He was embalmed. If they had not known he was 
dead, they would not have embalmed his body. "One 
hundred pounds weight," extraordinary quantity; denotes 
great honor. There is no proof that the disciples watched 
the tomb. Great emphasis is laid on the constancy of 
the women. The mother of Jesus is not mentioned. 
The incident is important in the chain of testimony to 
the identity of his body. A contradiction as to the time 
of buying spices is alleged. Compare Lk. 23 : 56 with 
Mk. 16 : 1. No real contradiction. Some may have been 
brought at one time, some at another, or some on both 
evenings. But it is asked " If they saw the burial by 
Joseph and Nicodemus, why this additional anointing?" 
John 19:40 shows that Joseph's was used. Nor is it 
probable that the women were ignorant of the first 
anointing. No real difficulty. It was a new proof of 
love. Becoming that the last sacred offices should be 
performed by intimate friends. 

Strauss asks: " If they knew the tomb was sealed, 
and a watch set, how did they expect to get in ?" Some 
reply, " they did not know." But the body was in 
Joseph's tomb and his property: to be watched, but not 
kept by the soldiers. 

§158. The Watch at the Sepulchre. Saturday Nisan 16. 
According to Bleek, Nisan 15. When did priests apply 
to Pilate ? On Friday evening — wdiich was part of the 
Sabbath, or Saturday morning? Either way they break 
the Sabbath. But why not Saturday night? The words 
force the conclusion that they went on the Sabbath. 
But a night has intervened. There is however no break 
in the continuity of the witness for identity. The Jews 
would not seal an empty tomb. They would make sure 



191 

of that. The prediction was that he would rise on the 
third day. So no danger of his being stolen till the 3d 
day. 

Did Pilate mean by his reply " Ye have a watch," the 
band of Levites comprising the Temple watch, or the 
soldiers who crucified him? Better to understand it as 
imperative — " Have a watch." They take Roman sol- 
diers. Meyer singularly discards this whole account. 
His objections : 1. That Christ's predictions were too 
enigmatical to be known by the priests. Even the Apos- 
tles did not understand them, and the priests did not get 
them from the disciples after his death, for they were 
depressed and had forgotten the prediction. The priests 
say " We remember." They may have obtained it from 
believers before the crucifixion. At any rate they wish 
to test the truth of it ? 2 If the priests feared removal of 
the body it was suicidal to allow it to remain in custody 
of friends. But they did not fear till they heard the 
friends had the body and then took immediate precau- 
tions. If the body was taken away Pilate would punish 
the soldiers in execution of Roman Law. But they 
would invent an improbable lie. He argues the greater 
probability is against the truth of the narrative. Where- 
fore the Greek recensiou of Mt. But it is found in Mt. 
alone, because Mt. wrote for Jews. 

This Sabbath was indeed a final day. Lange says it 
was not the last Sabbath of the old economy for that con- 
tinued till Pentecost. 

From the Resurrection to the Ascension. 

• The length is not given in the Gospels. They record 
but two Sabbaths and a journey to Galilee. But in Acts 
1 : 3, ' ; for forty days, jueza to rcaftslv &i>zbv" forty has 
some "significance. It was practically time enough to 
prove the resurrection. Proofs are frequent varied and 
numerous. We can trace a picture of the subjective 
state of the disciples. Why was the mode of our Lord's 
communication so changed ? He appears only at inter- 
vals. Acts 1: 3. Of course then not still in state of 
humiliation. Had there been no change — resurrection 
would have been more doubted. Again, it may have 
been to change the feelings of the disciples towards him. 



192 

Their faith and love to him must be made as great as to 
God, by his total absence in body and yet spiritual presence. 
Here they were in different places and yet all present in 
body with him in each place. This shows how he is 
with us now. 

The nature of his Resurrection Body ? Three an- 
swers : I. Some argue with Rob. and Meyer that it was 
the same material body which lay in the tomb. a. 
Nature of proofs of identity : Jesus said " A spirit hath 
not flesh and bones as ye see me have." Shows his 
wounds and eats with them. b. The ascension was the 
moment for transformation. According to this, his trans- 
portation through space, entering through the closed 
doors, &c, are specific miracles. II. The change to a 
spiritual body occurred at Resurrection. But this con- 
tradicts his own words. Lk. 24 : 39. III. An interme- 
diate condition suited to the period of transitions. A 
material body but endowed with new properties. We 
are safe only in holding to the facts which are : 1. The 
body was the same. This was necessary to recognition. 
2. Some change in appearance is shown by the tardy 
recognition. This is partly accounted for by the subjec- 
tive state of the disciples, partly as meant by him, for 
Mk. 16 : 12 says, " sv krepa popy?}." 3. Either super- 
naturally endowed, or instrument of miraculous power. 
4. Not fully transformed. " Flesh and blood can not in- 
herit the kingdom of God." 

Harmony. We have four accounts from different 
points of view, none complete. It is not a continuous 
history of a life, but a series of disconnected miraculous 
appearances, hence the difficulty. Doubtless, too, the* 
stupendous character of the events make witnesses con- 
fused. Again all is not recorded. John 20 : 30. Acts 
1 : 3. Comp. 1 Cor. 15. No contradiction can be estab- 
lished. Means for determining the exact order do not 
exist in the narrative. General traits are the same. The 
same prominence given, in all, to the accounts of the 
women and the angels. The same messages are sent to 
the disciples. The very differences prove the simplicity 
of the witnesses. So in general differences. It is re- 
markable that Mt. should narrate only the events which 
occurred in Galilee, while Mk. and Lk. those in Jud. 



193 

and Jems., John giving both, ch. 20 being laid in Jerus. 
and ch. 21 in Gal. Rationalists ascribe this to mixed 
tradition. But it is really a striking proof of the very 
opposite; and can be accounted for only by the special 
design of each. Mt. depicts the royal majesty of the 
risen Lord, contrasted with Jewish expectations and con- 
fines himself to Gal. as in his ministry. Being opposed 
to Judaism, his record is out of Jerus. Mk. establishes 
the fact of the resurrection by the transition in the mind 
of the disciples from doubt to faith, the risen Son of 
God working on his church by his power through the 
ministers of his word. Lk. connects resurrection with 
the sufferings and the unity of the two and preseuts 
Christ as the great High Priest — the Redeemer of all 
men, proclaiming remission to all nations beginning at 
Jerus. In John is shown the effect on the inner circle of 
believers — the relation of the resurrection to the faith 
and life of the individual. 

N. B. (For the order of the several Evangelists see 
Diagram). 

Resulting Difficulties: 1. The time of the visit of the 
women. Mt. says "at the end of the Sabbath." Hence, 
it is argued it was at sunset. But rather, early in the 
morning. All say very early. Mk. says however the sun 
was risen, or else Mk. contradicts himself. Or we may 
say one account may date from the time of starting and 
the other from arrival. 

2. Mt. and John do not give the object of their going: 
but this is manifest. Mk. and Lk. distinctly say to 
anoint his body. 

3. Mt. seems to imply that they saw the earthquake 
and the stone rolled away. Rob. suggests a pluperfect 
sense. This is impossible. Aorists, however, are indefi- 
nite. He don't say it then occurred. Some understand 
the earthquake figuratively. The mere mention of this 
is its refutation. The fathers say Christ left the tomb 
before the stone was rolled away — as he needed no help 
to rise. Henry says, Angels aided him as token of their 
loyalty. Remark, they shall assist in the general resur- 
rection. The act of resurrection was seen by none. 
Only friends beheld the resurrected Lord. In regard to 
the other difficulties ; older harmonists took every thing 



194 

as a different account and so give various companies of 
women, &o. Others make but one group. Ebrard says 
the main point in all was the appearance of Christ to the 
XL Before, all was prefatory. He gives as illustration : 
" A friend of mine is at the point of death. I am just 
returning from a journey. On my way I am met in suc- 
cession by different friends : One tells me of his illness, 
two others inform me of his death, a fourth gives me a 
ring which he has bequeathed to me. I hasten to the 
house and find a mournful scene. On my return I write 
to an acquaintance, and with the scene at the house most 
vivid in my mind, I write briefly of the rest, that on 
my way home I met four friends who told me of his 
death and gave a ring. Of what importance to the 
reader, whether all came together, or successively or 
which brought the ring?" 

4. While John speaks of Mary Mag. alone, Syn. 
represent others. Mt. Mary Mag. and another Mary. 
Mk. adds Salome. Lk. mentions two Marys, Joanna and 
others, a. Ebrard takes John as fact. But Syn. group 
her visit with others, b. Lange, Westcott, Ores, and 
others separate Lk. and suppose two companies. One 
led by Maiw Mag., the other by Joanna. This is im- 
probable, as Lk. mentions Mary Mag. himself, and leaves 
the difficulty with John. More probably Lk. is with the 
other Syn. c. Lightfoot, Rob., &c, say all came together 
and John specifies Mary Mag. to tell individual faith. 

5. How many visions of angels ? Syn. record as if the 
women at first saw the angels. John as if they appeared 
to Mary Mag. on the second coming. Clearly two ap- 
pearances of angels. John confines his narrative to Mary 
Mag. who ran back to the disciples before actually reach- 
ing the sepulchre. Lightfoot combines them all into one. 
Those who have two companies make three visions. 

6. Number of angels. Mt. gives one sitting outside. 
Mk. one inside. Some say the stone was rolled inward 
so Mt. agrees with the others. Some saj- it was in the 
vestibule. Some, there were two angels. Either they 
did not see the angels till they were inside, or the angels 
moved. Lk. says "they stood" which may mean as some 
render " appeared suddenly." John says Mary Mag. saw 
two angels. This is a distinct vision. So Lk. also gives 



195 

two. If two companies there is no question : if one — 
there is no contradiction. The explanation seems to be : 
There was one main fact, — a vision of angels — more ac- 
curately, of two angels. 

7. Message of angels. In Mt. and Mk. the angel tells 
them to meet Jesus in Gal. This is natural, as Mt's 
narrative is Galilean. Lk. reminds them of his words in 
Gal. John records the message as given by Jesus him- 
self, to Mary Mag. Here those who make two compa- 
nies have no difficulties, nor those of one company either, 
as each tells what his plan demands. Each account calls 
to mind an empty sepulchre as the first witness. The 
angels point to it, and this accounts for Mary Mag.'s haste 
at her first visit. The angels first announce the fact " The 
Lord is risen " as a report from heaven. That the 
angels appear and disappear in a remarkable manner is 
insisted on by those who make these mere visions, and 
hence all dependent on the subjective state of the wit- 
nesses. If so, how is it that the keepers see the angels? 
This is to prove that the stone was not moved by the 
earthquake. The disciples do not see them, because their 
faith is to be tried before they can be constituted eye-wit- 
nesses of the truth to the church. They must themselves 
experience difficulties of faith in what seemed to them 
disputable. The whole question of vision of angels ad- 
mits of a very easy explanation on the ground of simple 
natural variety of accounts. Lessing says : " Do you not 
see that the Evangelists do not count the angels ? There 
were millions of angels around the tomb." Lange : 
" These harmonies are in the form of a four- voiced 
narrative, and indicate an agitated state of the Evan- 
gelists." 

8. Did Christ appear to Mary Mag. alone or to more ? 
Sceptics argue much from the ease with which women 
are deceived. The great fact of the Resurrection of 
Christ was to rest on testimony ; so it is first to come to 
the disciples in that form, to subject them to trial and 
discipline them. This is prominent throughout. Angels 
bear witness to the women — they to the Apostles — they 
to the world. Mt. makes two Marys meet Jesus, in 
company with all the women. But John says Jesus met 
Mary Mag. alone on her return to the city. Mk. says 



196 

" He appeared firstto Mary Mag." There are three ex- 
planations : 1. Lightfoot, &c., make but one appearance 
and that to Mai^ Mag. alone. Mt. generalizes. The 
appearance was to Mary but he says " to the women." 
2. Lange, Gres., two appearances, the first to Mary : 
Strauss objects on ground of time. He says " Where 
are the women all this time?" Do they, as some say, 
linger near the tomb, or do they go back to the city, or 
is it as Gres. supposes, a week before Christ appears to 
the other women ? Most of us are content to say we are 
responsible only for the succession of events and don't 
care what the women were doing. Kob. says there were 
two appearances, but the first was to the women. Mk's 
statement that Mary was first is but relative— i. e., the 
first of the three recorded by him. But Mk. is too 
emphatic to admit of any such explanation. 

9. According to Mt., Lk. and John, the women go im- 
mediately in joy to the Apostles. Mk. says 'dudevt dudiv 
Icttov. Admission into two companies is artificial. Mk's 
obvious meaning is they did not stop to tell every body 
they met. 

§163. Mary Magdalene summons Peter and John. While 
the women are with the angels, Mary Mag. has gone to 
call John .and Peter. There is a significance in their 
being together and Mary's going to them. " Theyounger 
reaches the tomb first " says Harte. Peter impulsive is the 
first to rush in. There they find the linen clothes lying. 
Not carried away at if the body had been stolen, or 
as if the death of Christ were an imposition and he had 
escaped : but neatly folded, and laid away, indicative of 
tranquillity. John "saw and believed" — what? that 
the tomb was empty ? No! but in the full significance 
of the scene. Lk. makes Peter stoop. John very 
vividly describes himself as stooping and looking in. 

§164. Jesus appears to Mary Magdalene. Mary is con- 
spicuous as of a most loving spirit. She is standing 
weeping — and does not share the faith of John — and a 
man appears. She does not at once recognize him. This 
indicates a change in external appearance or Mary would 
have known him. It also confirms the reality of the 
resurrection. If it were a mere subjective vision, she 
would have thought it to be Christ at first. This and 



197 

the walk to Ernmaus are fatal to the visionary theory. 
Notice the peculiar inconsistence of Strauss. He says 
" A myth originating in Gal. some time after Christ's 
death. It grew out of a growing reverence for Christ 
and a study of Messianic prophecies." But how does it 
suit Dr. Strauss to account for Mary's seeing Christ 
here? Her idea cannot be accounted for on this theory, 
for she had no thought of the resurrection and Strauss 
says Christ had never predicted it ! 

" Touch me not." The rebuke is to Mary's mistake. 
She supposed that ordinary intercourse was to be re- 
newed. Jesus warns her that it is not to be so. He 
virtually says, " No longer is sense, but faith, to be the 
mode of communion." 80 when he said to the eleven and 
Thomas, "Handle me," there is no inconsistency, 
as then he wished to convince them of his bodily identity. 
Mary is here already convinced of that. 

§162. Jesus meets the women. Mt. says Jesus met the 
women and gave them the message; how can we recon- 
cile that with this ? Some argue that they are the same 
occurrence. But it is better to regard them as different. 
Three Evangelists distinctly state that the Apostles did 
not believe the report of the women. This is natural. 
It doubtless sounded strange to them that the women 
alone saw what Peter and John did not 6ee. They were 
in a state of fear and excitement. 

§165. The Report of the Watch. Reported by Mt. only 
as he alone gave the account of its being set. The offer 
of bribes to the soldiers. The story is incredible on the 
face of it. It was impossible for the disciples to steal the 
body. Grotius collects evidence of its currency among 
the Jews in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, and says it was 
still believed by them ! Strauss objects : " Is it likely 
that the whole Sanhedrim at a regular meeting would 
unite in giving official sanction to a lie ?" Ebrard 
replies : "Is it likely that the whole Sanhedrim at a regular 
meeting would unite in a judicial murder? — The mar- 
vel is what pious, conscientious men the San. become in 
the hands of Dr. Strauss. The whole of Christendom, a 
multitude of humble, quiet men, may have devised and 
adhered tenaciously to a bare-faced lie ; but the murder- 
ers of Jesus were incapable of persuading these soldiers 



198 

to propagate a trilling untruth, which their own conduct 
had rendered necessary!" The priests believed the res- 
urrection, as they knew of the empty tomb, not with a 
full faith, but as they had already witnessed many mira- 
cles. Their consciences were uneasy. The Apostles do 
not refer to this because they had better proofs, and this 
lie was not current in the places to which they were 
sent. Why not mentioned in Acts 4? Because the 
Sanhedrim did not deny the resurrection in their earlier 
persecutions. 

§166. Jesus seen of Peter. The ten go to Emmaus. The 
third appearance, and first to an Apostle, was to Peter 
after the two went to Emmaus: Lk. 24: 34; I. Cor. 
15:5. An honor to Peter considering his denial, and 
intended as a help to his repentance. The walk to 
Emmaus shows the feeling of the disciples. The mis- 
take of these men and their non-recognition are incom- 
patible with the visionary theory. Who were the two ? 
Wies., &c. understand Cleopas to be Alphaeus (Mt. 10:3), 
and the other, the Apostle James his son. This is not 
probable. Lightfoot thinks the second person was Peter. 
Some, that he was Luke. Discrepancy: Mk. says their 
report is not believed ; Lk. that the eleven anticipated 
them with " The Lord is risen indeed and hath appeared 
unto Simon." Therefore they did belie\e. The ques- 
tion of Harmony is interesting, as on it turns the point, 
whether the Apostles believed at all on testimony, or 
remained unbelieving till they saw for themselves. The 
margin of the E. V. makes Mk.'s statement a question, 
which has little foundation. Some say they believed 
Peter, but could not believe the two from Emmaus, as 
it was a seeming contradiction that Christ should be seen 
by both. If this is a true solution it remains that all but 
Peter (and Thomas) believed upon testimony. The two 
going to Emmaus betray a dim idea that the third day 
should bring some chauge and yet it was almost ended. 
The breaking of bread probably not Lord's Supper. 
The instructions of Jesus to the two agree with Lk's re- 
port of the words of the angels. 

§167. Jesus appears to the Apostles. Thomas absent. 
Sunday evening. Most important and perhaps most de- 
cisive for then were their doubts finally overcome, and 



199 

they are appointed witnesses for the future. Given by 
Mk., Lk., John, Paul. Mk. and Lk. close their narra- 
tive here, as the last essential thing. Mk. introduces a 
third appearance ; Lk. shows his bodily presence, — the 
nature of his resurrection body and the scars of his 
crucifixion. The question now was not the fact of his 
resurrection but the reality and identity of his body. 
They were at their evening meal, perhaps in the room 
where they kept the passover. Coming through closed 
doors — Lutherans say it shows the ubiquity of Christ's 
person. The point of the visit was to show that he was 
not a spirit. He declares his body to be " flesh and 
bones." Handling him was an important evidence. (1 
John 1 : 1). Lk. adds a crowning evidence in Christ's 
eating. It is commonly accepted that it was not for 
nourishment, but as evidence of his material body. 
The identity of his bod} 7 could not be better proved. 

The Apostolic Commission is now given, which shows 
the spiritual import of the resurrection. It was because 
they were personally convinced that they are made wit- 
nesses. Paul (1 Cor. 15: 5) speaks of Twelve. Syn. 
give eleven. Clear and important that other Christians 
were present as juad-rjrat. The two from Emmaus w r ere 
plainly present. Thus the powers here conferred were not 
confined to apostles alone. Was the commission given 
to-night? Mk. and Lk. add it here as the last thing. 
Van Oos. puts it after v. 44. John leaves no doubt that 
the commission was given here. So it was twice given. 
The commission to witness, preach and administer dis- 
cipline was based on the gift of the Holy Ghost as 
authority. John says he breathed on them, and saith 
" Eeceive ye the Holy Ghost." This was in consequence 
of the resurrection. It was not howeveV plenary, but 
partial and preparatory, corresponding to their wants till 
Pentecost. There was need of it ; they were passing 
through a critical period. A transition from doubt to 
faith. They had still to gather and guide the body of 
disciples till Pentecost. (N. B. The distinction between 
nueujuta aycov here and to Tiveufxa aytov in Acts is untenable). 
Strauss says the command to tarry at Jerus. (in Lk.) con- 
tradicts the command to go to Gal. Van Oos. and Alf. 
say this command was not given till after the return from 



200 

Gal. Bnt there is no inconsistency. One qualifies the 
other. The " tarry " qualifies the Commission. Make 
Jerus. your headquarters, and do not go to preach till 
after Pentecost. 

§168. Jesus appears to the Twelve. Thomas present. 
Time 2d Sabbath. John alone records it. 1. How came 
the apostles still in Jerusalem ? a. They would not travel 
during the feast, which lasted till Friday, b. Some think 
unbelief kept them. Thomas and others still doubted. 
c. Others suppose the command to go was accompanied 
by an intimation as to when and how. 2. Why together 
on the first day of the week ? To commemorate the res- 
urrection ? Certainly it is the beginning of the Christ- 
ian Sabbath. They meet Christ on these days only. The 
force of their example is sanctioned by Christ. What 
was Thomas's reception ? Jesus commends Thomas for 
faith, but shows there is a higher faith based on spiritual 
evidences and shows the danger of subjecting faith to 
sense or reason. Thomas is convinced before putting his 
test to practice, and joyfully believes. 

An important point : that the claim of Divinity is 
variously made elsewhere, but here only in the Gospels 
is dsot; applied to Christ by the disciples or accepted by 
him. The Gospel of John begins : " The word was 
God " and closes with " My Lord and My God !" 

§169. Jesus appears to seven Apostles on the sea of 
Tiberias. By most harmonists put before Mt.'s narrative 
because of Jno. 21 : 14. The charge of Meyer that Paul's 
statement (I. Cor. 15 : 5-7), cannot be reconciled is not 
sustained. One explanation is that Paul includes under 
the expression "seen of the twelve," the three of John; 
or it may be that Paul summarizes. The first appear- 
ance would be at the grave, then at Jerus. in vicinity of 
the tomb. But it must not be confined to Jerus. as the 
witness is to extend to hundreds of believers in Gal. It 
is also to show the bodily relations of Jesus ; he was 
superhuman as to extension. Again, by this he corrects 
the mistaken idea of the disciples, that the new Dispen- 
sation should be also a Theocracy in Jerus. Comp. Acts 
1. Disciples had gone to Gal. and returned to their 
daily occupation. Early in the morning Christ appears 
on the shore and repeats the miracle that had called them 



201 

at first — thus reinstating them. A promise of great suc- 
cess in their work is seen in the number of fishes taken. 
There is no evidence that the fire and the bread were 
miraculous. They were significant of rest after toil. The 
results of toil give joy. Peter is especially reinstated. 
The three-fold question refers to the denials: "Simon, 
Son of Jonas!" alludes to his original nature, reminding 
him of his unrenewed state. Notice the comparison 
" more than these " based on " though all should forsake 
thee, yet will not I." Peter's humility appears in his 
not using the comparison. Peter asserts but the hum- 
bler personal love, wdeco ; Jesus used the higher, aya-aw. 
but at last descends to use even (pekeco. Notice also (a) 
lambs, (b) sheep, (c) little sheep. Also Tzotfiacvztv and 
ftoaxecv. The martyrdom of Peter is added to show his 
confidence in Peter's constancy. When this book was 
written Peter had been long dead and there is a reference 
to John's life and exemption from martyrdom. Upon 
Jno. 21 : 24 is based a strong argument for the author- 
ship of the book. 

§170. Jesus meets the Apostles and 500 on a mount in Gal. 
Paul, I. Cor. 15: 6. This is the same as Mt.'s eleven. 
It involves the question whether the commission was 
given to the whole church or not. Not so, unless others 
besides the eleven were present. The chief evidence is 
from Mt. himself: 1. Why appoint a meeting on a 
mount in Gal. for eleven only ? 2. Mt. says some wor- 
shipped but some doubted like Thomas. 3. Mt. 28 : 7 
says "there shall ye see him" in the message to the 
women. 4. There is reason why Mt. should emphasize 
the eleven, as to him the ecclesiastical commission was 
the prominent thing. Notice, they went where they were 
commanded, hence had an interesting meeting. A for- 
tuitous gathering is inconceivable. A general summons 
was necessary. The 21st of John gives us the probable 
occasion of the command. Compare the second or great 
commission in Mt. with John. 1. This (Mt.'s) makes no 
mention of suffering or of the reality of his resurrection 
body. 2. It is fuller than the previous one. 3. Sets 
forth the completed authority of Christ as its basis. In 
Acts we have only the story of this work. This Com- 
mission is the basis of the Christian sacrament of Bap- 
tism. 



202 

§171. Our Lord is seen of James, then of all the Apostles. 
Which James? More likely James of Jerus. than the 
son of Zebedee, but it cannot be determined. Luke in 
Acts implies manifestations which are not recorded. 
Several facts are gathered from Acts 1, e. g. that Christ's 
mother and brethren accompanied him to Gal. Addi- 
tional evidences of continued false expectations on part 
of the Apostles. Again they are to tarry in Jerus. till 
they be "baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days 
hence." Also the order of the conversion of the world 
is given : "In Jerus. and in all Judea, and in Samaria 
and even to the uttermost parts of the earth." From 
the climactic advance in the proofs of the resurrection, 
we find a final argument against the subjective visionary 
theory. ~No such thing could have arisen from merely 
accidental visions to different persons. 

§172. The Ascension. At the end of the 40 days our 
Lord once more appears. It is at Jerus. He ascends in 
sight of the disciples. This is the proper conclusion of 
the record. The Ascension is necessarily associated with 
the resurrection for there could be no more death to 
Christ. He must ascend, and in presence of the dis- 
ciples. They had seen him appear and disappear for 40 
days. If this then was no more formal than those, they 
would be continually looking for him to return. Even 
as it was the} 7 expected him to come again in their own 
day. Also gives a definiteness and location to our ideas 
of a risen Lord and a Christian heaven. We cannot now 
enter into the difficulties suggested by the Lutherans and 
others. Concerning the sacraments — local limitation, 
&c, can only touch on critical objections. Place of the 
Ascension : An apparent contradiction : Bethany (Lk.), 
Mount of Olives (Acts). But they are so near to each 
other that there is no real difficulty. Was it visible to 
others than disciples? Hard to conceive that it was. 
John and Mt. don't mention the ascension at all. Only 
Mk. and Lk. tell of it, and Tisch. rejects aveipeptro from 
Lk. Then Acts is our only authority for a visible ascen- 
sion. But Tisch. is not followed "by most critics. At 
any rate, it is in Acts which is by Lk. Mk. and Lk. had 
a special object in recording it. Both show Christ as the 
Savior of the world and look to the future history of the 



203 

church. And though Mt. and John omit it, yet they 
refer to it in the Gospel. The going away is not the 
final point, for he is to come again. 

Mk. seems to connect the ascension immediately with 
the first interview with the eleven on the resurrection 
Sunday. Lk. seems. to imply the same thing. It is after 
the report of the two from Emmaus. (Though in Acts 
it is " after 40 days)." Upon this is based the theory of 
repeated ascensions. Baur says Evangelists teach that 
Christ's abode after the resurrection was in heaven. So 
some Harmonists. The sceptics say there were two tra- 
ditions of his Ascension. One on the first Sunday — and 
another (Galilean) after an interval of 40 days. But 
notice, the difficulty cannot be so great, or Lk. is at dis- 
cord with himself. He records it in both forms ; and a 
sufficient explanation is found in the intention of the two 
passages. The mode of ascension was exquisitely ap- 
propriate. His speaking with them — blessing them, and 
then rising from them till a cloud enfolds him, concealing 
him from their sight. The words of the angels, also, to 
the gazing disciples sanction the church's attitude of ex- 
pectation. And he said that true waiting is to work as 
well as to wait. 



H 129 79 ** 




>..** 



v* 





-*- .,* 





4.°-^ 






<PX 






v. ***°* > 








o v 








C, rP 







0' 




* ^ 



,0' 








5 "o.\* A <. 





^ 



<\ 






4.* ^o- 





^ * 












<. 







,^ ^. 




o * o , ^ * A 
_^ ... - S- 










-^ll^ *w .*iH 

ISfiSr ° % S V °W§f 

7VTC2 • «?"<?•,'» t' iS S% 
?**^ </ *o *-f.V A" 



^/ 





«b v* • «^ia*. 



"3^ 



^ 




